Sci-Fi/Fantasy Nielsen Ratings (Feb 24)

6 views
Skip to first unread message

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS
rec.arts.tv, rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.startrek.current, alt.tv.x-files,
alt.tv.lois-n-clark, alt.tv.xena, rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated

Notes:
- Network: Date matches broadcast date.
- Syndicated: Date matches Nielsen's listed date not broadcast date.
- (R) repeat episode for >network shows only<
- --- pre-empted episode
- ??? rating unknown
- *** season premiere
- Network: 1 Rating=970,000 homes/97.0 million homes total
- Syndicated: 1 Rating=959,000 homes/95.9 million homes total
- Share is the percentage of all TVs currently turned on.
- Best viewed with a non-proportional font: Courier/Monaco/VT100

NETWORK:
ABC 8.9 CBS 10.6 NBC 10.6
Fox 7.8 UPN 2.9 WB 2.5

PRIME-TIME: February 24-02 (last week)
Rank Net/Rating/Share
41 The X-Files(R) FOX/ 9.6% /15%
70 Pretender(R) NBC/ 6.4% /12%
74 Profiler(R) NBC/ 6.1% /11%
76 Sliders FOX/ 5.8% /11%
77 Millenium(R) FOX/ 5.7% /10%
79 Lois & Clark ABC/ 5.1% / 9%
83 Dark Skies NBC/ 4.6% / 9%
83 Voyager UPN/ 4.6% / 7%
--- The Burning Zone UPN/ pre-empted

SYNDICATED: February 10-16 (three weeks ago)
Rank Net/Rating
-- Xena MCA/ 7.7
-- Hercules MCA/ 6.9
-- Deep Space Nine Par/ 6.0
-- Outer Limits ???/ 3.6
-- Babylon 5 PTN/ 3.4

CURRENT SEASON RATINGS:
Lois X Dark Mill Pro Pre Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
9/02 ---- (R) ---- ---- --- (R) *5.9 (R) (R) (R) (R)
9/09 ---- (R) ---- ---- --- (R) 5.2 (R) (R) (R) (R)
9/16 *7.7 (R) *8.1 ---- *9.2 *5.6 4.3 (R) (R) (R) (R)
9/23 8.5 (R) 7.4 ---- 8.5 5.6 5.1 (R) (R) (R) (R)
9/30 9.4 *13.2 --- ---- --- 7.2 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.3 *3.0
10/07 7.8 11.9 --- ---- --- 6.5 4.7 *5.6 *5.8 *5.3 3.6
10/14 8.3 11.3 5.7 ---- 7.8 6.3 (R) 6.0 5.4 5.6 3.1?
10/21 7.2 11.7 4.7 *11.9 6.6 --- (R) 5.7 5.8 5.4 3.3?
10/28 --- 12.3 6.2 8.1 8.0 5.9 4.6 5.0 5.2 5.5 3.4?
11/04 7.8 11.1 6.0 8.1 7.5 6.1 5.6 ??? 5.7 5.2 *3.6
11/11 7.6 10.7 6.3 7.6 8.7 5.4 5.8 7.7 6.1 5.7 3.7
11/18 8.1 12.2 --- 7.6 --- 5.6 4.7 7.0 6.4 6.3 3.6?
11/25 --- 10.6 --- 7.2 --- 5.2 4.7 6.0 6.2 6.3 3.6?
12/02 5.4 (R) 4.9 7.5 (R) (R) 5.7 (R) 6.0 5.5 5.1 ???
>>>>>>>FALL GAA(REPEATED VIEWINGS) AVERAGE RATINGS>>6.5 6.2 6.1 3.7<<
12/09 7.1 10.7 4.7 (R) 7.7 7.5 --- 4.9 5.2 5.1 5.6 ???
12/16 --- (R) --- 6.8 --- ??? 6.0 (R) 5.1 5.5 5.4 ???
12/23 --- (R) --- (R) --- ??? (R) (R) 4.1 5.0 4.5 ???
12/30 5.5 ---- 6.3 6.9 8.5 8.5 6.0 (R) 4.9 5.0 5.1 ???
1/06 (R) 13.3 4.9 7.1 7.1 7.0 (R) 4.2 6.0 5.8 5.4 ???
1/13 6.4 (R) 5.0 (R) 7.6 7.6 6.0 4.8 6.0 5.3 5.0 ???
1/20 (R) 17.2 --- 7.6 --- (R) (R) (R) ??? 5.9 6.0 ???
1/27 --- 13.0 5.0 8.0 7.9 7.8 6.7 4.6 ??? 5.1 6.1 3.7?
2/03 --- 11.5 4.7 7.1 6.3 6.9 --- 4.6 6.2 6.4 6.3 4.0?
2/10 --- 10.3 --- 6.8 8.0 7.5 --- 5.4 6.0 6.9 7.7 3.4
2/17 --- 10.9 --- 6.4 --- --- 5.3 4.3 ??? ??? ??? 3.2
2/24 5.1 (R) 4.6 (R) (R) (R) 5.8 4.6

OTHER NEWS:
Star Wars: $125.1 million in re-release...$447.9 million since 1977!
The Empire Strikes Back: $40.2 million in re-release.

SWEEPS RATINGS:
>>87< TNG
November Average 6.0

>>88< SomethingOutThere TNG
10/30 9.0 ???
11/07 --- ???
11/14 --- ???
11/21 5.8 ???
11/28 9.5 ???

>>89< QuantumLeap TNG
10/16 ???? 9.6
10/23 10.0 9.6
10/30 9.4 9.9
11/06 10.3 ???
11/13 9.8 ???
11/20 10.4 ???
11/27 12.0 ???

>>90< QuantumLeap TNG
10/29 8.2 11.4
11/05 8.2 12.0
11/12 7.8 ????
11/19 --- 12.0
11/26 8.3 11.5

>>91< QuantumLeap TNG
10/28 11.2 12.3
11/04 10.0 13.4
11/11 9.7 15.4
11/18 11.0 15.4
11/25 11.2 13.9

>>92< Sightings QuantumLeap TNG
10/26 6.3/5.5 8.0 13.2
11/02 6.2/--- --- 13.7
11/09 6.9/--- 9.3 13.5
11/16 6.1/--- 8.9 13.4
11/23 4.8/4.8 9.3 13.2

>>93< Sightings QuantumLeap TNG DS9 B 5
2/01 7.2/6.3 --- 11.3 12.9
2/08 7.1/6.3 7.3 14.1 12.8 B 5
2/15 7.8/7.0 --- 13.1 12.1
2/22 7.5/7.0 7.5 13.8 11.6 pilot movie
3/01 6.6/5.5 9.0 13.8 8.8

>>93< Sightings QuantumLeap TNG DS9
4/26 6.5/6.1 ---- 9.4 9.9
5/03 6.3/5.9 13.7 11.2 9.3
5/10 5.2/4.5 ---- 11.4 9.2
5/17 6.4/6.1 ---- 11.3 9.0
5/24 5.6/5.5 (R) 10.6 9.7

>>93< Lois X Brisco sea TNG DS9
11/01 ---- 6.6 6.0 10.1 12.2 9.7
11/08 9.0 6.5 6.4 --- 12.1 9.2
11/15 11.0 5.4 5.8 9.1 11.6 8.8
11/22 11.5 --- --- 10.6 11.9 9.4

>>94< Lois X Brisco sea Viper TNG DS9 ActionPac B 5
1/24 5.6 4.8 --- --- 7.7 11.8 7.5 8.8 6.9
1/31 10.1 7.6 6.1 8.7 --- 9.7 8.6 ??? ???
2/14 8.5 6.2 5.1 7.7 5.8 11.9 8.2 6.5 ???
2/21 11.7 --- --- 8.7 5.7 11.4 9.5 5.8 ???

>>94< Lois X Brisco sea Crypt TNG DS9 ActionPac B 5
4/25 8.5 8.2 5.8 10.0 ------- 9.9 8.6 ??? ???
5/02 10.2 7.9 --- 10.0 4.9/5.5 11.4 8.3 7.2 ???
5/09 ---- 8.8 4.8 8.7 4.0/4.4 11.3 8.0 6.9 ???
5/16 ---- 5.6 5.0 8.1 4.6/5.3 11.3 8.9 ??? ???
5/23 6.1 6.6 4.0 4.3 4.2/4.3 ???? 6.6 ??? ???
5/30 7.4 6.1 4.0 --- 4.6/4.8 17.4 6.2 ??? ???

>>94< Lois X MANTIS sea E-2 ST6 DS9 ActionPac B 5
10/31 ---- 9.4 5.3 --- 15.6 13.5 7.4 5.8 ???
11/07 11.3 9.5 5.0 9.7 10.5 --- 8.0 6.1 ???
11/14 11.7 9.0 5.6 9.8 8.8 --- 8.1 6.5 ???
11/21 ---- --- --- 10.7 9.7 --- 8.5 6.8 ???

>>95< Lois X MANTIS sea E-2 Crypt VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
1/30 ---- 11.3 --- --- 7.8 6.2/6.7 8.8 7.4 6.3 --- ???
2/06 11.3 10.3 4.4 --- --- ------- 8.5 8.2 ??? --- ???
2/13 11.3 11.2 5.2 8.5 6.7 ------- 7.9 8.3 ??? --- ???
2/20 10.5 10.1 --- 8.2 6.6 5.6/5.2 7.7 8.1 ??? --- ???

>>95< Lois X VR5 sea E-2 Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
4/17 (R) (R) 3.8 --- 6.9 6.7 (R) 7.1 ??? --- ???
4/24 ---- 8.9 4.2 7.4 --- 5.9 6.4 6.9 ??? --- ???
5/01 ---- 8.5 3.8 --- --- 6.1 6.4 6.9 5.1 --- ???
5/08 10.1 9.4 4.2 --- --- 5.6 6.1 ??? ??? --- ???
5/22 6.9 8.1 --- 4.4 3.6 --- ??? 6.9 5.6 --- ???
5/29 8.0 7.6 --- --- 6.1 --- 3.9 ??? ??? --- ???

>>95< Lois X Space sea StrLuck VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
10/23 9.0 9.4 --- --- --- 4.9 7.7 5.8 5.2 3.2?
10/30 10.8 10.2 5.8 6.2 5.6 6.1 7.2 5.8 ??? 3.1?
11/06 12.7 10.4 8.3 6.0 5.9 5.8 7.0 6.4 ??? 3.1?
11/13 ???? ???? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? 2.9?
11/20 11.3 9.8 5.0 --- --- 5.4 5.3? 5.5? ??? 2.6?
11/27 ---- 12.0 6.4 --- 6.3 5.9 6.9 5.6 5.9 3.2?

>>96< Lois X Space StrLuck Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
1/29 ???? ???? ??? ??? --- ??? 5.7 7.0 5.5 3.4?
2/05 12.9 10.6 5.0 6.5 --- 5.1 7.0 6.5 5.7 2.9?
2/12 11.6 10.8 4.4 --- --- 6.0 ??? ??? ??? 3.1?
2/17 ???? ???? ??? --- ??? ??? 7.3 6.7 5.7 ????
2/26 7.9 9.3 --- --- 6.2 5.6 6.7 6.5 ??? 3.1?

>>96< Lois X Space DrWho Kindred Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
4/29 9.3 10.2 --- --- 5.9 4.9 4.7 6.5 4.9 5.0 3.4?
5/06 9.1 9.7 --- --- 5.5 --- 5.0 5.3 5.0 4.7 3.2?
5/13 --- 11.2 --- 5.5 --- --- 4.5 5.6 4.7 5.1 3.2?
5/20 5.4 6.7 2.9 --- --- 4.2 4.9 6.0 5.4 5.1 3.2?

>>96< Lois X Dark Mill Pro Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
10/28 --- 12.3 6.2 8.1 8.0 5.9 4.6 5.0 5.2 5.5 3.4?
11/04 7.8 11.1 6.0 8.1 7.5 6.1 5.6 ??? 5.7 5.2 3.6
11/11 7.6 10.7 6.3 7.6 8.7 5.4 5.8 7.7 6.1 5.7 3.7
11/18 8.1 12.2 --- 7.6 --- 5.6 4.7 7.0 6.4 6.3 3.6?
11/25 --- 10.6 --- 7.2 --- 5.2 4.7 6.0 6.2 6.3 3.6?

>>97< Lois X Dark Mill Pro Pre Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
1/27 --- 13.0 5.0 8.0 7.9 7.8 6.7 4.6 ??? 5.1 6.1 3.7?
2/03 --- 11.5 4.7 7.1 6.3 6.9 --- 4.6 6.2 6.4 6.3 4.0?
2/10 --- 10.3 --- 6.8 8.0 7.5 --- 5.4 6.0 6.9 7.7 3.4
2/17 --- 10.9 --- 6.4 --- --- 5.3 4.3
2/24 5.1 (R) 4.6 (R) (R) (R) 5.8 4.6

* Questions, comments, additions, complaints *
* please email Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com *

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Ted McCoy

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

In article <8580130...@dejanews.com>,
<Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com> wrote:
>SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS

>
>CURRENT SEASON RATINGS:
> Lois X Dark Mill Pro Pre Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
> 1/27 --- 13.0 5.0 8.0 7.9 7.8 6.7 4.6 ??? 5.1 6.1 3.7?
> 2/03 --- 11.5 4.7 7.1 6.3 6.9 --- 4.6 6.2 6.4 6.3 4.0?
> 2/10 --- 10.3 --- 6.8 8.0 7.5 --- 5.4 6.0 6.9 7.7 3.4
> 2/17 --- 10.9 --- 6.4 --- --- 5.3 4.3 ??? ??? ??? 3.2
> 2/24 5.1 (R) 4.6 (R) (R) (R) 5.8 4.6

Just curious, which episodes were attached to those last four B5 ratings?
I'm wondering if the 4.0 was "Into the Fire," and the next two represented
the fallout. Personally, I know at least two formerly semi-regularly B5
viewers who abandoned B5 in disgust after "Into the Fire"'s resolution. I'm
still more or less sticking with the show myself, but I am finding myself
considerably less excited about seeing new episodes now then I was a few weeks
ago.


Ted

Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

[Newsgroups line trimmed...]

> SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS
>
> PRIME-TIME: February 24-March 02 (last week)


> Rank Net/Rating/Share
> 41 The X-Files(R) FOX/ 9.6% /15%
> 70 Pretender(R) NBC/ 6.4% /12%
> 74 Profiler(R) NBC/ 6.1% /11%

A continuing trend: "Pretender" beats "Profiler" (first-run or reruns).

> 76 Sliders FOX/ 5.8% /11%

FOX claims to see an "upturn" in "Sliders'" ratings, especially during
Feb. sweeps. Thus the show will not be put on hiatus now, and will run
through May. In other words, renewal looks a lot more likely now.

> 77 Millenium(R) FOX/ 5.7% /10%
> 79 Lois & Clark ABC/ 5.1% / 9%

ABC will soon be moving L&C to Satudays at 8pm. In case you don't know,
Satudays at 8pm is a *deathslot* for ABC. This can not be good news for
the show. I don't care if it was renewed through 1998! It looks to me like
L&C may get cancelled in May.

> 83 Dark Skies NBC/ 4.6% / 9%

This is very frustrating. DS seems to be getting better and better, and
yet no one is there to see it. Too bad, as this show has really grown on
me of late...

Next week: Troy gets to add "Buffy, The Vampire Slayer" to his list! ;)
--
Ian J. Ball | Want my TV episode guides or rec.arts.tv FAQ?
Grad Student, UCLA | http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/IJBall.html
IJB...@aol.com | ftp://members.aol.com/IJBall3/FTP/
i...@ucla.edu | "What to do, with time so short?..."

Matthew Murray

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

On 10 Mar 1997, Ted McCoy wrote:

> Just curious, which episodes were attached to those last four B5 ratings?
> I'm wondering if the 4.0 was "Into the Fire," and the next two represented
> the fallout. Personally, I know at least two formerly semi-regularly B5
> viewers who abandoned B5 in disgust after "Into the Fire"'s resolution. I'm
> still more or less sticking with the show myself, but I am finding myself
> considerably less excited about seeing new episodes now then I was a few weeks
> ago.

If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.

===============================================================================
Matthew Murray - n964...@cc.wwu.edu - http://www.wwu.edu/~n9641343
===============================================================================
The script calls for fusing and using our smarts,
And greatness can come of the sum of our parts.
From now on, I'm with you--and with you is where I belong!

-David Zippel, City of Angels
===============================================================================


Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.970310...@statler.cc.wwu.edu>,
Matthew Murray <n964...@statler.cc.wwu.edu> wrote:

> If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
> that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.

I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
Delenn, was surprisingly good).

Erin

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

> Next week: Troy gets to add "Buffy, The Vampire Slayer" to his list! ;)

I tuned in over Spy Game this week... I really liked Buffy, it kept my
attention a tad more than SG so I might just watch it every week. Anybody
know what timeslot it'll be running in from now on??

Erin

Franklin Hummel

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <IJBall-1003971255400001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,

Ian J. Ball <IJB...@aol.com> wrote:
>I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
>myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
>pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
>stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
>Delenn, was surprisingly good).


I don't follow B5.mod as much as I once did, but I did see a fair
amount of criticism about ItF in there (in addition to what was posted in
SF TV).

Did JMS respond at all to the criticism? Did he have anything to
say about why he ended the Shadow War as he did?

-- Franklin Hummel [ hum...@world.std.com ]
--
====================================================================
* NecronomiCon, 3rd Edition: The Cthulhu Mythos Convention *
15-17 August 1997, Providence, Rhode Island
Visit our NEW web site at: http://www.necropress.com/necronomicon

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <IJBall-1003971047510001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,

IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:
> Next week: Troy gets to add "Buffy, The Vampire Slayer" to his list! ;)

"Oh...rapture!" -Brother Theo, Babylon 5.

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <5g1k5s$9kk$3...@mathserv.mps.ohio-state.edu>,

mc...@math.ohio-state.edu (Ted McCoy) wrote:
>
> In article <8580130...@dejanews.com>,
> <Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com> wrote:
> >SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS
> >
> >CURRENT SEASON RATINGS:
> > Lois X Dark Mill Pro Pre Slide VOY DS9 Her Xen B 5
> > 1/27 --- 13.0 5.0 8.0 7.9 7.8 6.7 4.6 ??? 5.1 6.1 3.7?
> > 2/03 --- 11.5 4.7 7.1 6.3 6.9 --- 4.6 6.2 6.4 6.3 4.0?
> > 2/10 --- 10.3 --- 6.8 8.0 7.5 --- 5.4 6.0 6.9 7.7 3.4
> > 2/17 --- 10.9 --- 6.4 --- --- 5.3 4.3 ??? ??? ??? 3.2
> > 2/24 5.1 (R) 4.6 (R) (R) (R) 5.8 4.6
>
> Just curious, which episodes were attached to those last four B5 ratings?
> I'm wondering if the 4.0 was "Into the Fire," and the next two represented
> the fallout. Personally, I know at least two formerly semi-regularly B5
> viewers who abandoned B5 in disgust after "Into the Fire"'s resolution. I'm
> still more or less sticking with the show myself, but I am finding myself
> considerably less excited about seeing new episodes now then I was a few weeks
> ago.
>
> Ted

The individual episode ratings are (I believe):
3.7 The Episode Before ITF ;)
4.0 Into the Fire
3.4 Epiphanies
3.2 The Illusion of Truth
??? Atonement

Julie Griffiths

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:
>
> ABC will soon be moving L&C to Satudays at 8pm. In case you don't know,
> Satudays at 8pm is a *deathslot* for ABC. This can not be good news for
> the show. I don't care if it was renewed through 1998! It looks to me like
> L&C may get cancelled in May.

I heard that Dean Cain was going to hang up the cape as he didn't want
to be identified with the Superman character forever, like his
predecessors,
i.e. George Reeves and Christopher Reeve. In which case, L&C is doomed
anyway.

Julie

Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <3325AA...@arc.ab.ca>, Julie Griffiths
<grif...@arc.ab.ca> wrote:

That's partly true. Cain has publically said that, were it his choice, he
would leave at the end of this season,. He wants to pursue a movie career.
However, he has a contract through year #5, and has said he'll honor it,
if forced to (remember Pierce Brosnan and "Remington Steele"?...).

But Cain's desire to leave is another nail in L&C's coffin, in my opinion.
Bad ratings, moves to even worse timeslots, and a star who wants to leave
(badly!).

That's a recipe for cancellation if ever I've heard one. (In fact, there
is a definite parallel here to what happened with ABC's "My So-Called
Life" and Claire Danes...)

Richard Nelson

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

>> If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
>> that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.

>I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,


>myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
>pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
>stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
>Delenn, was surprisingly good).

I agree with Ian and Ted[post deleted]. The conclusion in ITF was
little more than the resolution of Infection, with a really big
setup for it.

Since ITF, I have been toying with selling off my entire B5 video
collection, my heart's just not into it as much anymore.

Rick
--
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________.sig____________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
The generic .sig Richard Nelson rble...@ucsd.edu

Dennis Clark

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Richard Nelson (rble...@sdcc3.ucsd.edu) wrote:
> In article <IJBall-1003971255400001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu> IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) writes:
> >In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.970310...@statler.cc.wwu.edu>,
> >Matthew Murray <n964...@statler.cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
>
> >> If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
> >> that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.
>
> >I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
> >myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
> >pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
> >stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
> >Delenn, was surprisingly good).
>
> I agree with Ian and Ted[post deleted]. The conclusion in ITF was
> little more than the resolution of Infection, with a really big
> setup for it.
>
> Since ITF, I have been toying with selling off my entire B5 video
> collection, my heart's just not into it as much anymore.

Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war
goes away? The war was the catalyst to bring a bunch of other brewing
troubles into the open, the Minbari social crisis, EarthDome social crisis,
the Centauri crisis, Narn, SciCorp,... That was the point, the fight crisis
isn't over when the war ends. In my old D&D days we called battle mongers
with no thought as to plot "munchkins", though usually they were the 12
and 13 year olds, no attention span.
Don't give up! Hell, there's plenty more oportunity for fighting left!
I mean, we haven't yet seen how Centauri Prime gets burned, right?
EA is likely to attack B5 at least once more, now that most of the ships
will be going home to help clean up the mess after the First Ones' war
is over... Talk about loose threads! What about the Psisickles? Renegade
Shadow and Vorlon allies? Lots of opportunity for violence 8-P

DLC
--
============================================================================
* Dennis Clark Aristocrat in Training d...@verinet.com *
* Be well, do good work, and stay in touch -- Garrison Keillor *
============================================================================

ljm...@pacbell.net

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:
>
> In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.970310...@statler.cc.wwu.edu>,
> Matthew Murray <n964...@statler.cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
>
> > If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
> > that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.
>
> I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
> myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
> pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
> stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
> Delenn, was surprisingly good).

I'm glad I"m not the only one who feels something's lacking in B5 now.
I used to watch it totally entralled---it was good vs. evil on an epic
scale. Now, with the First Ones and the Vorlons, etc gone, it's just
another space opera, although still good. But I miss the excitement...
some of the most memorable moments involved Kosh (sigh). Maybe JMS
has some surprises in store for us?

Laura

--
To email a reply, change 2002 to 2001

Jose Gonzalez

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

On 11 Mar 1997, Richard Nelson wrote:

> Since ITF, I have been toying with selling off my entire B5 video
> collection, my heart's just not into it as much anymore.

Although I wouldn't go quite that far, more than one of my friends who
were *huge* B5 fanatics once upon a time have expressed similar
sentiments. After "Into the Fire," one of them gave B5 the worst insults
he could muster, "It's become Voyager." (:

He's only watching now because he's come this far with the show, and
that's about all.

Personally, I thought the resolution was okay. It wasn't terrible, but it
simply isn't a matter of thinking of a better way to resolve it that would
have helped. When you get an ending like that, you start to wonder if the
entire arc was misplayed, and that perhaps something else should have been
done, if this was the only way to end it.

Anyway, I'm with B5 for the long haul. It's not as good as it should be,
and a lot of its potential materializes only rarely, but it's still an
entertaining hour most of the time.

I just wish that "The Coming of Shadows," the undisputed high mark of the
show, hadn't come so early in the run. Makes you wonder if the whole move
to the Shadow conflict wasn't a mistake, seeing as how powerful the
Narn/Centauri conflict proved to be in that episode. (Note how much more
successful the Narn half of "Into the Fire" was.)

Ah well. You take what you can get.

-
Jose Gonzalez

William December Starr

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <IJBall-1003971047510001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,

IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) said:

> In article <8580130...@dejanews.com>,
> Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com wrote:
>
>> SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS
>>

>> PRIME-TIME: February 24-March 02 (last week)


>> Rank Net/Rating/Share
>> 41 The X-Files(R) FOX/ 9.6% /15%
>> 70 Pretender(R) NBC/ 6.4% /12%
>> 74 Profiler(R) NBC/ 6.1% /11%
>

> A continuing trend: "Pretender" beats "Profiler" (first-run or reruns).

This topic may have already been hashed out, but... why is
"Profiler" in this report at all? Are Sam's abilities to think
like a criminal and "see" his/her actions considered to be psychic
in nature?

-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>


Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

In article <5g586q$i...@crl6.crl.com>, wds...@crl.com (William December
Starr) wrote:

I always though it was in there more for comparisons with "Millennium"
than for the "SF value" of "Profiler". Personally, I don't interpret Sam's
"visions" as "psychic", but me Mum thinks just the opposite! ;>
--
Ian J. Ball | Want to get the rec.arts.tv FAQ, or my other TV
Grad Student | episode guides? Try:
IJB...@aol.com | http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/IJBall.html
i...@ucla.edu | ftp://members.aol.com/IJBall3/FTP/

DJS

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:(snipped)

> But Cain's desire to leave is another nail in L&C's coffin, in my opinion. Bad ratings, moves to even worse timeslots, and a star who >wants to leave (badly!).
> That's a recipe for cancellation if ever I've heard one. (In fact, >there is a definite parallel here to what happened with ABC's "My >So-Called Life" and Claire Danes...)

Another parallel that comes to mind is the demise of the Beauty and
the Beast series a few years ago. Things started to fall apart
despite a very vocal (albeit relatively small), fan base, when they
couldn't compete in the ratings game.
Consequently the series was shifted around to various time slots,
and towards the end the co-star Linda Hamilton finally just wanted
out. After she was written out of the plot, the new storyline...with a
new actress in tow... never really got out of the starting gate. The
show was cancelled despite last ditch efforts to save it by its fans.

The same kind of deja vu seems to be sneaking it's way into Lois
and Clark. I still maintain (and seem to be of the relative few...)
that they should have kept the romance developing slowly, with
more plots based on their being reporters first, and kept the big
"M" till the very end of the show's run. This way they could have kept
some of the nice romantic tension that they had in the first three
seasons and the fans would still have the big payoff in the end, thus
giving the series a satisfying finish. Might not have made the series
last any longer, but at least many of the plots might not have been
so lame. Some of the best stories have always been when Lois and
Clark are out being the Daily Planet's ace reporters, and how they
relate to one another on that level. It's the wonderful give and
take of two very different, yet quite similar people that give Lois
and Clark it's zing....

But that's just this dog's humble opinion...and who listens to a has-
been Supermutt these days anyway?

Krypto

Mike Barklage

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com writes:

>In article <5g1k5s$9kk$3...@mathserv.mps.ohio-state.edu>,
> mc...@math.ohio-state.edu (Ted McCoy) wrote:
>> Just curious, which episodes were attached to those last four B5 ratings?
>> I'm wondering if the 4.0 was "Into the Fire," and the next two represented
>> the fallout. Personally, I know at least two formerly semi-regularly B5
>> viewers who abandoned B5 in disgust after "Into the Fire"'s resolution. I'm
>> still more or less sticking with the show myself, but I am finding myself
>> considerably less excited about seeing new episodes now then I was a few weeks
>> ago.

>The individual episode ratings are (I believe):


>3.7 The Episode Before ITF ;)
>4.0 Into the Fire
>3.4 Epiphanies
>3.2 The Illusion of Truth
>??? Atonement

Hmmm... looks like there was a peak on either side of ITF. Although I
thought ITF was a little dissapointing, I will give it the benefit of the
doubt -- the lost viewers the following weeks could have just been the
war-mongers looking for a big battle episode (and don't give a hoot about
the Earth or Minbari stories to follow). In other words, B5 was going to
lose ratings numbers over the next few eps whether ITF had been a great
episode or not.


Mike Barklage

World's Worst Computer Programmer -- MSTie #19634 -- bark...@ucsu.colorado.edu
For MiSTings and Ed Wood items, link to http://rtt.colorado.edu/~barklage
"In the beginning, there was nothing, which exploded." -- Terry Pratchett

Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <5g4ntj$7o6$1...@cactus.verinet.com>, d...@verinet.com (Dennis
Clark) wrote:

> Richard Nelson (rble...@sdcc3.ucsd.edu) wrote:
> >
> > Since ITF, I have been toying with selling off my entire B5 video
> > collection, my heart's just not into it as much anymore.
>

> Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war
> goes away?

That's not really fair, Dennis. Sure, I would like to have seen a
mega-battle that would have taken place over 2-episodes. But that's not
what turned me off about ItF.

What turned me off was the way the whole resolution was handled. There are
many points on this which I don't feel like totally going in to. But
basically, the dialogue during the resolution was very *clunky*, and very
unsatisfying. And as many others have pointed out, there was almost
*nothing* sacrificed to achieve this resolution. It was easy. It cost
*nothing* that we the viewers really cared about. It cost nothing to the
Vorlons and Shadows as well. This last point (that the Vorlons and Shadows
were let off the hook) *really* irks me.

What really pisses me off overall, though, was that a show that "prides
itself on not taking the easy way out" *took* the easy way out in ItF.

> The war was the catalyst to bring a bunch of other brewing
> troubles into the open, the Minbari social crisis, EarthDome social crisis,
> the Centauri crisis, Narn, SciCorp,...

Which is fine, in as far as it goes. I like the EarthGov conflict, and
want to see more of it. But introducing the Shadow War was not necessary
to precipiate these Home World crisies. And once brought up, a *lot* more
should have been done with the ending of the Shadow War.

> Don't give up! Hell, there's plenty more oportunity for fighting left!

Well, though I didn't say it, this was another thing that almost caused me
to lose interest in B5 after ItF: the fact that I am becoming more
convinced that B5 will not be renewed for a 5th season.

I think winding up the Shadow War in season #4 gives WB a perfect excuse
to end B5 this season, and wind up the show in a couple of 2-hour movies.
--

tomlinson

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Dennis Clark (d...@verinet.com) wrote:

: Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war
: goes away?

<swear> Why does _everyone_ who positions himself/herself as a
defender of "Into the Fire" automatically assume that all of us,
who expresses some misgiving with the episode, wanted to see a
huge space battle?

If I may quickly summarize an issue on which I have written many
dreary paragraphs: "Into the Fire" failed because it demonstrated
that JMS wished to manipulate B-5's main story thread into a
vehicle for his worldview; this _in itself_ is neither here nor
there (hell, _all_ fiction writers express a worldview in their
work) but his execution was so clumsy, so transparent, and so
unilateral that I was completely repulsed. JMS chose that
weakest of devices, a speech, with which to deliver his dose
of wisdom; he placed it in the mouth of a poorly-drawn
character, with whom were are obviously _meant_ to sympathize;
he weakened all other sides of his argument that _his_ side
came through without hindrance (the Vorlons and the Shadows
he causes to lapse into murderous barbarism); everything
doubled and redoubled to that crucial moment when Sheridan
and Delenn get to mouth JMS's earnest orations. This
"victory" is so contrived and tinged with self-complacence
(e. g. Delenn's "you have lost your way"; Sheridan's
deliberate use of terms such as "child race") that it is
_completely lacking in force_.

"Into the Fire" was the logical end of the path along which
JMS forced the story arc ever since (so far as I can detect)
the end of the second season. This was no local failure.

_Enough_ of this stupid, illogical assumption that we all
want to see violence.

Cheers,
-et
--
Ernest S. Tomlinson | I know thee not, old man: fall to thy prayers;
etom...@rohan.sdsu.edu | How ill white hairs become a fool and jester!
------------------------+ I have long dream'd of such a kind of man,
So surfeit-swell'd, so old, and so profane / But, being awake, I do
despise my dream.

jere7my tho?rpe

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <IJBall-1103971754370001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,
IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:

* I think winding up the Shadow War in season #4 gives WB a perfect excuse
* to end B5 this season, and wind up the show in a couple of 2-hour movies.

Just a note...JMS has been saying the Shadow War would end in early
season 4 since before it began, as his season 2 quotes on the Lurker's
Guide should bear out. (Actually, he originally planned to end it by the
end of season 3...) On the other hand, he has also said that, had season 5
been assured, ItF probably would have been a 2-parter, so there apparently
was some rushing.

----j7y

******************************** <*> ********************************
jere7my tho?rpe "If they had a King of Fools
University of Pennsylvania then I could wear that crown,
Engineering & Applied Science and you can all die laughing
Office of Undergraduate Education because I'll wear it proudly."
(215) 898-7246 ----Elvis Costello

Dennis Clark

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

tomlinson (etom...@rohan.sdsu.edu) wrote:
> Dennis Clark (d...@verinet.com) wrote:
> : Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war
> : goes away?
>
> <swear> Why does _everyone_ who positions himself/herself as a
> defender of "Into the Fire" automatically assume that all of us,
> who expresses some misgiving with the episode, wanted to see a
> huge space battle?

I stand corrected.



> If I may quickly summarize an issue on which I have written many
> dreary paragraphs: "Into the Fire" failed because it demonstrated
> that JMS wished to manipulate B-5's main story thread into a

[snip]


> "Into the Fire" was the logical end of the path along which
> JMS forced the story arc ever since (so far as I can detect)
> the end of the second season. This was no local failure.

I don't look at it this way. If we look at the number of
episodes totally dedicated to the Vorlon/Shadow conflict vs.
the number of episodes dedicated to the other conflicts in
the show, the wrap-up of this bit of business is appropriate.
The Vorlons and Shadows were these big boogymen that were
used (however appropriately) to whip the other races and
factions into order. Now that that whip is gone, what will
take its place? Now that everyone is on their own, what
will happen?
As you can tell, I don't feel that big "thunk" that you
and others feel from ItF's wrap-up of the "big" war. I am
looking forward to the other thread's resolutions!



> _Enough_ of this stupid, illogical assumption that we all
> want to see violence.

Again, mea culpa. I stand so guilty, and contrite.

for fun,

Emiko's Agent

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:

[snip]

> I think winding up the Shadow War in season #4 gives WB a perfect excuse

> to end B5 this season, and wind up the show in a couple of 2-hour movies.

Wind up this newsgroup too, I guess :)

--
Emiko's Agent
-------------------------------------------------------------
EMIKO'S GENESIS: http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~ikim
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cool girls of anime:
Belldandy - better than all the rest, especially Ayanami Rei!
Emiko - ACD officer of Genesis; one spunky pink haired girl!
Others: Ibuki, Chun-li, Cammy, and Sakura! (Street Fighter)
Yuri (Galaxy Fraulien Yuna)! Nuku-Nuku (APCCG Nuku Nuku)!
Lita/Makoto (Sailor Moon)! Mai (Emiko's sidekick, Genesis)!
-------------------------------------------------------------

Kay-Yut Chen

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

On 10 Mar 1997 20:52:28 GMT, IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) wrote:

>In article <Pine.ULT.3.91.970310...@statler.cc.wwu.edu>,
>Matthew Murray <n964...@statler.cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
>
>> If that's your feeling, Ted, I think it's probably pretty likely
>> that you have never been particularly excited about watching Babylon 5.
>
>I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
>myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
>pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
>stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
>Delenn, was surprisingly good).

>--

I guess I have to add a "me-too" here. My wife and I watches B5
religiously before "Into the Fire" and lately we are less and less
enthusiatic about the show. It has something to do with the easy
resolution of the war and also all the big mysteries seem to have run
their courses.


=====================================================================
| A Traveler between dimensions | |
+ ------------------------------+ |
| |
| In the Kingdom of Drakkar, I am known as <Narius the Mentalist> |
| To the denizens of Britainnia, my name is <Seldon the Avatar> |
| The Terran Confederation pilots call me <One the Cat Slayer> |
| |
| Seldon Dragon |
| #UDIC# |
| |
| <<Kay-Yut Chen>> |
| |
=====================================================================

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <5g586q$i...@crl6.crl.com>,
wds...@crl.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>
>
> In article <IJBall-1003971047510001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,

> IJB...@aol.com (Ian J. Ball) said:
>
> > In article <8580130...@dejanews.com>,
> > Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com wrote:
> >
> >> SCIENCE FICTION/FANTASY TV RATINGS
> >>
> >> PRIME-TIME: February 24-March 02 (last week)

> >> Rank Net/Rating/Share
> >> 41 The X-Files(R) FOX/ 9.6% /15%
> >> 70 Pretender(R) NBC/ 6.4% /12%
> >> 74 Profiler(R) NBC/ 6.1% /11%
> >
> > A continuing trend: "Pretender" beats "Profiler" (first-run or reruns).
>
> This topic may have already been hashed out, but... why is
> "Profiler" in this report at all? Are Sam's abilities to think
> like a criminal and "see" his/her actions considered to be psychic
> in nature?
>
> -- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>

I put in Millenium, because I thought it would be more sci-fi. Then
somene requested Pretender a very similar show...it's close enough to
sci-fi/fantasy to be included. Ditto with Pretender.

Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <E6vyw...@world.std.com>,

hum...@world.std.com (Franklin Hummel) wrote:
>
> In article <IJBall-1003971255400001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,
> Ian J. Ball <IJB...@aol.com> wrote:
> >I doubt you can say that, Matthew. And Ted's surely not the only one. I,
> >myself, have lost at least some interest in B5 after "Into the Fire's"
> >pretty poor resolution. If it weren't for the EarthGov stuff, I might have
> >stopped watching entirely (though the last episode, the Minbari one with
> >Delenn, was surprisingly good).
>
> I don't follow B5.mod as much as I once did, but I did see a fair
> amount of criticism about ItF in there (in addition to what was posted in
> SF TV).
>
> Did JMS respond at all to the criticism? Did he have anything to
> say about why he ended the Shadow War as he did?

I don't recall any direct response to the criticism from JMS. He simply
explained that what we saw is what he planned from the beginning. To
paraphrase: "Before the show started, I was asked by _____ what the story
was about, and I told him that it is was about breaking away from your
parents." OK, so the Shadows and the Vorlons are the parents, the First
Ones are the relatives, and the younger races (humans, Minbari, Drazi, et
cetera) are the children who are breaking away.

That's the story JMS wanted to tell, and that's the story we got.

If you didn't like it, well, wait for the next "TV novel" to come along.
Babylon 5 is just like any other book you might pick off the shelf.
Sometimes you get to the end and think, "Wow! That was really good." and
sometimes you reach the end and think, "That's it? I wasted two weeks
reading this piece of crap?" Based on the feedback, it sounds like most
people had the last response.


BUT...

BUT the story isn't over yet, and there are still alot of fights ahead
besides the Shadows. G'Kar said it perfectly.

G’Kar: G’Quon wrote, “There is a greater darkness than the one we fight.
It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way.” The war we fight
is >NOT< against powers and principalities. It is against CHAOS...and
DESPAIR. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope. The
death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender.

Matthew Murray

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

On Wed, 12 Mar 1997 Troy_...@ccmail.orl.mmc.com wrote:

> If you didn't like it, well, wait for the next "TV novel" to come along.
> Babylon 5 is just like any other book you might pick off the shelf.
> Sometimes you get to the end and think, "Wow! That was really good." and
> sometimes you reach the end and think, "That's it? I wasted two weeks
> reading this piece of crap?" Based on the feedback, it sounds like most
> people had the last response.

Your analogy isn't quite correct. Sometimes you reach the end of
a book and think, "Wow! That was really good." Or, sometimes you stop
three or four chapters away from the end and think, "Ugh... They just
did something that I didn't like. I don't care what greater purpose it
served, or what else is going to happen in the rest of the book, I'm just
not going to read the rest of it to find out either way." Based on the
feedback, it sounds like quite a few people had the second response--the
response where, instead of juding the series as a whole, they are judging
the whole before the whole is completed.

Matthew Melmon

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <5g4ntj$7o6$1...@cactus.verinet.com>, d...@verinet.com (Dennis
Clark) wrote:

> Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war

> goes away? The war was the catalyst to bring a bunch of other brewing


> troubles into the open, the Minbari social crisis, EarthDome social crisis,

> the Centauri crisis, Narn, SciCorp,... That was the point, the fight crisis
> isn't over when the war ends. In my old D&D days we called battle mongers
> with no thought as to plot "munchkins", though usually they were the 12
> and 13 year olds, no attention span.

Into the Fizzle had no thought of plot. That is the problem.
Not the failure of a CGI war to appear "as promised."

The Shadows and the Vorlons of Into the Fizzle were *not*
the same aliens as introduced in seasons one and two. The
conflict between the two was *not* the conflict suggested
in seasons one and two.

If anyone can actually point to illustrations of the Vorlons
going about their "objective" (hell, if anyone can actually
state what the fuck that "objective" was), I encourage them
to knock themselves out trying. The most they ever did was
torture Delenn to make sure she was willing to die as an
unknown soldier. oh la la. Sure sounds like "order" to
me!

The Shadows were better developed. But. In Z'ha'dum and
Fizzle, we were told that the Shadows were interested in
"knocking over the ant-hill and letting the ants fight it
out to see who was stronger." Okay, fine. Standard social
Darwinist fare. But. What the Shadows were actually shown
doing was knocking over the ant hill and spraying the ground
with Raid. They took an active hand in frazzing the younger
races, and were being so effective at it that the ants wanted
to run off and hide. Not exactly "fight it out amongst
yourselves to see who is better" material.

That whole parenting angle - oi, vey, give me a break.

The parenting strategy of the Vorlons: "do what I say because
I say so." Yeah, baby! That works wonders with human children,
age two!

The parenting strategy of the Shadows: "do whatever you want
as long as it involves killing your siblings." Yeah, baby!
We have a winner!

With the exception of Fizzle, I've found season 4 much more
watchable than 3, even enjoyable. A pity the bomb had to drop
so early in the season.

Jonathan Blum

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <mattm-12039...@melmma1.apple.com>,

Matthew Melmon <ma...@apple.com> wrote:
>The Shadows and the Vorlons of Into the Fizzle were *not*
>the same aliens as introduced in seasons one and two. The
>conflict between the two was *not* the conflict suggested
>in seasons one and two.

Perhaps not the conflict you *thought* they were building up to in seasons
one and two, but the signs are there.

>If anyone can actually point to illustrations of the Vorlons
>going about their "objective" (hell, if anyone can actually
>state what the fuck that "objective" was), I encourage them
>to knock themselves out trying. The most they ever did was
>torture Delenn to make sure she was willing to die as an
>unknown soldier. oh la la. Sure sounds like "order" to
>me!

Wasting Deathwalker because the younger races "are not ready for
immortality", rather than having them make the nasty choice Deathwalker
presented them with on their own, sounds like a big sign that the Vorlons
want order and obediance.

Conditioning the younger races to see them as angels and instinctively
obey them also sounds like it works towards that objective, of having the
child races act the way the Vorlons tell them to. So does using Sheridan
to try to get all the younger races fighting on the same side against the
Shadows.

>The Shadows were better developed. But. In Z'ha'dum and
>Fizzle, we were told that the Shadows were interested in
>"knocking over the ant-hill and letting the ants fight it
>out to see who was stronger." Okay, fine. Standard social
>Darwinist fare. But. What the Shadows were actually shown
>doing was knocking over the ant hill and spraying the ground
>with Raid. They took an active hand in frazzing the younger
>races, and were being so effective at it that the ants wanted
>to run off and hide. Not exactly "fight it out amongst
>yourselves to see who is better" material.

If the ants are so scared that they want to run off and hide, that's the
ants' problem. Just like it's their problem if they get overwhelmed when
their neighbors attack them. When the Shadows attack openly, they're just
giving each of the lesser races a new problem to worry about, to see what
they can cope with. Remember, even when the Shadows were attacking, they
weren't wasting whole races -- sneak attacks, small raids, not a serious
full-on war.

And notice that the moment someone tries to *make* it a serious full-on
war, attacking the Shadow army directly... the Shadows respond by trying
to subvert them, turn them to fight against each other all over again.
That was the whole point of them asking Sheridan to Z'Ha'Dum, after all...

>That whole parenting angle - oi, vey, give me a break.

>The parenting strategy of the Vorlons: "do what I say because
>I say so." Yeah, baby! That works wonders with human children,
>age two!

So they think we're two-year-olds. I kinda figured that was the point.

>The parenting strategy of the Shadows: "do whatever you want
>as long as it involves killing your siblings." Yeah, baby!
>We have a winner!

What, you can't conceive of a parent stirring up sibling rivalry to try to
encourage their kids to outdo each other?

Regards,
Jon Blum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"All this time you two thought you were playing some twisted game of
chess... when it was just me playing solitaire!"
D O C T O R W H O : T I M E R I F T

tomlinson

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Jonathan Blum (jb...@Glue.umd.edu) wrote:

: Wasting Deathwalker because the younger races "are not ready for


: immortality", rather than having them make the nasty choice Deathwalker
: presented them with on their own, sounds like a big sign that the Vorlons
: want order and obediance.

"Comes the Inquisitor", however, works against this, possibly.
The Vorlons send to Delenn a man who, although apparently
motivated by a psychotic desire for order, also harbors a
contempt for blind adherence. He grinds into the dirt those
who believe themselves unique possessors of some _vision_ of
order ("the cog the machine who believes himself the whole of
the machine.")
This could be read any number of ways (back when B-5 kept
up some semblance of ambiguity.) Perhaps Kosh sent Jack
to Delenn on his own hook.

: Conditioning the younger races to see them as angels and instinctively


: obey them also sounds like it works towards that objective, of having the
: child races act the way the Vorlons tell them to. So does using Sheridan
: to try to get all the younger races fighting on the same side against the
: Shadows.

The revelation that the Vorlons possibly engaged in genetic
manipulation and conditioning strikes us all as repugnant, I
daresay. None of us likes to believe that we might be
"manipulated". But consider this: I resist deliberate
manipulation, by tangible outside forces (dictatorial
governments, propaganda, what you will) because I can
easily imagine the state in which such forces are absent.
There exists the possibility that I can _remove_ these
forces by willful action. Yet genetic "manipulation",
occurring as it did before my birth, is entirely outside
my control. It's hard-wired into me. On what do I base
my opposition? I cannot compare myself with an
"unmanipulated" self. I might as well rage against my
reflexes, or against my inability to do without sleep.

: So they think we're two-year-olds. I kinda figured that was the point.

Hell, maybe we are. "I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could
accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne
me..."

Jamie Plummer

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

William Cameron wrote:

>
> On 11 Mar 1997 05:33:24 GMT, "Erin" <er...@ziplink.net> wrote:
>
> >> Next week: Troy gets to add "Buffy, The Vampire Slayer" to his list! ;)
> >
> >I tuned in over Spy Game this week... I really liked Buffy, it kept my
> >attention a tad more than SG so I might just watch it every week. Anybody
> >know what timeslot it'll be running in from now on??
>
> 9:00 PM EST, with a repeat slot on Sundays apparently, around 5:00
> EST.

Repeat slots, if any, are within the discretion of your local WB
affiliate.

Matthew Melmon

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.970311194425.29337B-100000@mail>, Jose Gonzalez
<jo...@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us> wrote:

> (Note how much more successful the Narn half of "Into the Fire" was.)

Londo and G'Kar's story has been so consistently strong
since the beginning that I wonder if it was the backbone
of the original story concept. The Centauri and Narn
civilizations feel, to me, much more "realized" than
any of the others, including the "humans" (both the save-
the-galaxy humans and the strawman evil-badguy humans).

Gharlane of Eddore

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:(snipped)
>
> But Cain's desire to leave is another nail in L&C's coffin, in my opinion.
> Bad ratings, moves to even worse timeslots, and a star who wants to leave
> (badly!).
> That's a recipe for cancellation if ever I've heard one. (In fact, there
> is a definite parallel here to what happened with ABC's "My So-Called Life"
> and Claire Danes...)
>

In <33261D...@odyssee.net> dkst...@odyssee.net writes:
>
> Another parallel that comes to mind is the demise of the Beauty and
> the Beast series a few years ago. Things started to fall apart
> despite a very vocal (albeit relatively small), fan base, when they
> couldn't compete in the ratings game.

Well, it was a very-slightly-more-expensive-than-average show for
the time, and something very weird happened with the media coverage;
if you go back and look at all the glowing TV GUIDE articles from
the first year, and then take a look at the miserable slimy nasty
references that started to show up later, you'll see that someone at
TVG had it in for the show, badly. Linda Hamilton's voice-over, during
the opening credits, always *did* sound like she was being strangled,
because the lady had never had proper voice coaching, and hadn't
learned to talk without whining. Note that they *did* retrack her
opening voice-over, later on, and it sounded a *lot* better; since
she wasn't stupid, and wasn't without talent, she'd improved a lot.
However, TV GUIDE, which hadn't been able to say enough good about
her, suddenly discovered her voice and acting limitations, and began
dwelling on them.... remember those little uncredited one-liner gags
they were running on the picture pages? Sometimes it seemed like
half of them were slams aimed at BATB. And of course, none of those
sly little digs were *credited*, so there was no one to complain about
but the editors.

Remember that "TV GUIDE" is an advertising-driven publication; I've
always wondered whether Republic and the network just didn't budget
enough advertising bucks to buy more TVG covers and article space,
and thereby earned the wrath of the biggest "protection racket"
in the industry.

One of the producers of BATB has made some pointed remarks about how
hard it is to keep a series in focus when the network is trying to
get you to change it, and your leading lady suddenly shows up and
informs you that oh, by the way, she's having a baby, and she's
leaving the show to get into shape for a movie she's making with
her boyfriend..... he said they were keeping things under control
with the network until that point. The network apparently had zero
faith in a BATB series without Catherine, and wanted them to re-format
the series with Vincent *above* ground, fleeing from city to city,
looking for his lost son. (This way they could lose all the underground
standing sets, and lay off 95% of the regular actors; much cheaper.)
One source swears that a network idea man actually said something like
"It could be like, you know, 'THE FUGITIVE.'"

G.R.R. Martin and Ron Koslow and the rest of the group came up with a
format revision that allowed the use of a substitute main female
character, played rather ably by Jo Anderson, a heckuvvan actress,
and *demonstrated* that they could hold things together and keep the
show in motion without Hamilton, and make it just as interesting.
However, by this time the network was in "kill-the-show" mode, and
pre-empting it..... it didn't help that a major arc episode got
pre-empted by a live link from Red China during the dust-up there,
and instead of holding the film chain and running late to get the
whole episode out on the air, the network just kept it running,
and rejoined the show with a big chunk of narrative missing.

> Consequently the series was shifted around to various time slots,
> and towards the end the co-star Linda Hamilton finally just wanted
> out. After she was written out of the plot, the new storyline...with a

Your order of events is reversed, here; Hamilton wanted out *before*
the show started getting jerked around really badly, and they hacked
out an emergency cliff-hanger sequence that would allow them to use
her in one or two shows at the beginning of the next season, before
dying and passing the torch.

> new actress in tow... never really got out of the starting gate. The
> show was cancelled despite last ditch efforts to save it by its fans.
>

....<deletia; discussion of Lois & Clark>
>

...As far as I'm concerned, "LOIS AND CLARK" has had nothing to offer
since the end of the first season, when they decided to do without
Tracy Scoggins. (They had to do this, because the character and the
actress were both more interesting than "Lois"/Hatcher, and even
when they wrote "Cat" down, they still couldn't destroy her appeal..)
The vast majority of their scripts are pretty silly & unimaginative,
and it's only the production values that make them marginally watchable.

Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

In article <5ga0sh$i...@news.csus.edu>, ghar...@ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu
(Gharlane of Eddore) wrote:

> ...As far as I'm concerned, "LOIS AND CLARK" has had nothing to offer
> since the end of the first season, when they decided to do without
> Tracy Scoggins. (They had to do this, because the character and the
> actress were both more interesting than "Lois"/Hatcher, and even
> when they wrote "Cat" down, they still couldn't destroy her appeal..)
> The vast majority of their scripts are pretty silly & unimaginative,
> and it's only the production values that make them marginally watchable.

It wasn't just the removal of Scoggins (which I agree was a huge mistake).
It was all of the following:

1) the removal of Scoggins as "Cat"
2) the removal of John Shea as Lex Luthor
3) the replacing of the superior Michael Landes as Jimmy with that damn
annoying kid!
4) the toning down of Lane Smith as Perry White
5) the removal of Creator Deborah Joy Levine, and her being replaced with
some knuckle-headed shill from ABC
6) the coincident dumbing down of the scripts, co-inciding with the
"villain of the week" stories

All of these factors, which happened between season #1 and #2 destroyed
L&C. I agree with you: in season #1, L&C was one of the best, most
original and most interesting shows on TV. By season #2, it had sunk to
the level of this season of "Sliders".

Not a thing to aspire to...

Jose Gonzalez

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

On Thu, 13 Mar 1997, Matthew Melmon wrote:

> In article <Pine.SOL.3.95.970311194425.29337B-100000@mail>, Jose Gonzalez
> <jo...@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us> wrote:
>
> > (Note how much more successful the Narn half of "Into the Fire" was.)

Whoops. That should be the "Centauri half" of "Into the Fire." There
*wasn't* a Narn half in that one. (:

Bamfer

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Jonathan Blum (jb...@Glue.umd.edu) wrote:
: In article <mattm-12039...@melmma1.apple.com>,

: Matthew Melmon <ma...@apple.com> wrote:
: >The Shadows and the Vorlons of Into the Fizzle were *not*
: >the same aliens as introduced in seasons one and two. The
: >conflict between the two was *not* the conflict suggested
: >in seasons one and two.
:
: Perhaps not the conflict you *thought* they were building up to in seasons
: one and two, but the signs are there.
:
: >If anyone can actually point to illustrations of the Vorlons
: >going about their "objective" (hell, if anyone can actually
: >state what the fuck that "objective" was), I encourage them
: >to knock themselves out trying. The most they ever did was
: >torture Delenn to make sure she was willing to die as an
: >unknown soldier. oh la la. Sure sounds like "order" to
: >me!

Look *who* they used to carry out their torture.

: Wasting Deathwalker because the younger races "are not ready for
: immortality", rather than having them make the nasty choice Deathwalker
: presented them with on their own, sounds like a big sign that the Vorlons
: want order and obediance.

And don't forget the Vorlons were quite ready to destroy the entire station
in the pilot if Sinclair wasn't handed over to them for the attempted
assassination of Kosh. JMS handed everyone a huge clue-by-4 right there,
but most people sort of forgot about it.



: Conditioning the younger races to see them as angels and instinctively
: obey them also sounds like it works towards that objective, of having the
: child races act the way the Vorlons tell them to. So does using Sheridan
: to try to get all the younger races fighting on the same side against the
: Shadows.

End of "Fall of Night": Sheridan says exactly this to Delenn (and Delenn
answers, "It is as you say, a matter of interpretation").

There have been careful clues placed all over the place that the Vorlons
certainly had their own agenda, and that we wouldn't find it necessarily
in our best interests. People as long as two years ago picked up on it,
going by some of the discussions on the newsgroups, starting around the
end of season 2 (some of the more canny viewers were very suspicious of the
Vorlons waaaay back).

Sonja
--lans...@scf.nmsu.edu bam...@acca.nmsu.edu
"There are worlds out there where the sky's burning, and the sea's asleep,
and the rivers dream; people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere
there's danger. Somewhere there's injustice. Somewhere else the tea's getting
cold. Come on, Ace. We've got work to do!" -- Doctor to Ace, "Survival"


Matthew Melmon

unread,
Mar 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/14/97
to

In article <5g7ome$9...@cappuccino.eng.umd.edu>, jb...@Glue.umd.edu
(Jonathan Blum) wrote:

> In article <mattm-12039...@melmma1.apple.com>,
> Matthew Melmon <ma...@apple.com> wrote:
> >The Shadows and the Vorlons of Into the Fizzle were *not*
> >the same aliens as introduced in seasons one and two. The
> >conflict between the two was *not* the conflict suggested
> >in seasons one and two.
>
> Perhaps not the conflict you *thought* they were building up to in
> seasons one and two, but the signs are there.

No one will deny the quality of narcotics you appear to
have access to. The best mushroom has to be the one where
"Kill your siblings" equates with promoting "sibling rivalry."
Market that one, and you will become fabulously wealthy.

John Burroway

unread,
Mar 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/14/97
to

In article <3325FA...@pacbell.net>, ljm...@pacbell.net says...

>I'm glad I"m not the only one who feels something's lacking in B5 now.
>I used to watch it totally entralled---it was good vs. evil on an epic
>scale. Now, with the First Ones and the Vorlons, etc gone, it's just
>another space opera, although still good. But I miss the excitement...
>some of the most memorable moments involved Kosh (sigh). Maybe JMS
>has some surprises in store for us?

I for one am glad that B5 had a bit more than "good vs. evil on an epic scale".
If that had been all there was to the story I would have stopped watching in
the second season. I've seen plenty of good vs. evil stories, and they always
end the same way. Big fight to the death, good guys win, fade to credits. At
least this was fight to impasse, third party good guys win, get on with the
rest of the story.

--
'Come, my friends, 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world.'
j...@uakron.edu


Andrew Crisp

unread,
Mar 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/15/97
to

Ian J. Ball wrote:
>
> That's not really fair, Dennis. Sure, I would like to have seen a
> mega-battle that would have taken place over 2-episodes. But that's not
> what turned me off about ItF.
>
> What turned me off was the way the whole resolution was handled. There are
> many points on this which I don't feel like totally going in to. But
> basically, the dialogue during the resolution was very *clunky*, and very
> unsatisfying. And as many others have pointed out, there was almost
> *nothing* sacrificed to achieve this resolution. It was easy. It cost
> *nothing* that we the viewers really cared about. It cost nothing to the
> Vorlons and Shadows as well. This last point (that the Vorlons and Shadows
> were let off the hook) *really* irks me.
>
> What really pisses me off overall, though, was that a show that "prides
> itself on not taking the easy way out" *took* the easy way out in ItF.
>
Hello again. I'm both relatively new to B5 and this newsgroup, but I
saw ITF and a dozen episodes before it. So let me see if I got this
straight...

You're disappointed that the Shadow War ended the way it did, right?
That nobody "lost" anything. From my POV, two races lost big: the
Vorlons and the Shadows.

Remember the parallel: the Vorlons and Shadows as bickering "parents"
(or at least gaurdians) and the rest of us as kids. Now _all_ the kids
stand up and tell the parents to stuff it in their ear. You think that
_doesn't_ hurt? Rejection can tear at someone right to the core. And
this isn't the rejection of a person: it's of a species.

The Vorlons and Shadows had a choice; they could destroy Sheridan's
fleet (no sweat for races that pack planet-killers), maybe even take on
the ships holding the last First Ones. Or they could concede, and leave
the Galaxy en masse, thus sacrificing their role as gaurdians. But
destroying the fleet would only mean that both sides have proven they're
not gaurdians, but puppet-masters. "What is a man profited, if he gains
the entire world yet loses his immortal soul?"

In too much movie SF, the "easy way out" is to shoot it out.

--
Andrew B. Crisp
JET 2
NBCC Moncton
Part-Time Science Fiction writer

tomlinson

unread,
Mar 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/15/97
to

Andrew Crisp (mo03...@nbcc.nb.ca) wrote:

<explanation snipped.>

No. You can _say_ that it was not easy, but this was not
demonstrated in the episode itself. All that we have by
which to judge is what we see on screen--which, in this
case, consisted of two speeches, two enemies so demonized
that nothing they say could have any impact upon the
viewer, and a smug epilogue in which Sheridan intones
some lines about child races overseeing the Universe now.
(There is something truly frightening about the idea of
Sheridan, whose manner through the course of the series
evokes an overeager, slightly dim-witted kid, assuming the
mantle of one who has the destiny of the galaxy in his
hands.)

No amount of after-the-fact special pleading can alter
(IMO deliberately) clumsy execution.

Steven W. DiFranco

unread,
Mar 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/15/97
to

Matthew Melmon wrote:
>
> In article <5g4ntj$7o6$1...@cactus.verinet.com>, d...@verinet.com (Dennis
> Clark) wrote:
>
> > Jeese guys, you lose interest after the promise of a huge CGI war
> > goes away? The war was the catalyst to bring a bunch of other brewing
> > troubles into the open, the Minbari social crisis, EarthDome social crisis,
> > the Centauri crisis, Narn, SciCorp,... That was the point, the fight crisis
> > isn't over when the war ends. In my old D&D days we called battle mongers
> > with no thought as to plot "munchkins", though usually they were the 12
> > and 13 year olds, no attention span.
>
> Into the Fizzle had no thought of plot. That is the problem.
> Not the failure of a CGI war to appear "as promised."
>
> The Shadows and the Vorlons of Into the Fizzle were *not*
> the same aliens as introduced in seasons one and two. The
> conflict between the two was *not* the conflict suggested
> in seasons one and two.
>
> If anyone can actually point to illustrations of the Vorlons
> going about their "objective" (hell, if anyone can actually
> state what the fuck that "objective" was), I encourage them
> to knock themselves out trying. The most they ever did was
> torture Delenn to make sure she was willing to die as an
> unknown soldier. oh la la. Sure sounds like "order" to
> me!
>
> The Shadows were better developed. But. In Z'ha'dum and
> Fizzle, we were told that the Shadows were interested in
> "knocking over the ant-hill and letting the ants fight it
> out to see who was stronger." Okay, fine. Standard social
> Darwinist fare. But. What the Shadows were actually shown
> doing was knocking over the ant hill and spraying the ground
> with Raid. They took an active hand in frazzing the younger
> races, and were being so effective at it that the ants wanted
> to run off and hide. Not exactly "fight it out amongst
> yourselves to see who is better" material.
>
> That whole parenting angle - oi, vey, give me a break.
>
> The parenting strategy of the Vorlons: "do what I say because
> I say so." Yeah, baby! That works wonders with human children,
> age two!
>
> The parenting strategy of the Shadows: "do whatever you want
> as long as it involves killing your siblings." Yeah, baby!
> We have a winner!
>
> With the exception of Fizzle, I've found season 4 much more
> watchable than 3, even enjoyable. A pity the bomb had to drop
> so early in the season.


I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was
a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in
dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
viewers of any good magician. The setup is always supposed to be
surprising in its conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the
writer/director went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the
bull-whip. Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a whip
fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story surprising, when it
does not go as predicted.
--

[ Steven W. DiFranco, CEO WEBCRAFT Data Resources ][ "For the things
which
some men esteem to be of great worth, both to the body and soul, others
set at
naught, and trample under their feet." ][ Sounds like the writings of
2,570 years ago
hit the nail right on the head. ]

rs...@lehigh.edu

unread,
Mar 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/15/97
to

In article <332B0C...@apk.net>, "Steven W. DiFranco" <s...@apk.net> writes:

>Matthew Melmon wrote:
>
>I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was
>a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in
>dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
>their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
>viewers of any good magician. The setup is always supposed to be
>surprising in its conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the
>writer/director went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the
>bull-whip. Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
>sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a whip
>fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story surprising, when it
>does not go as predicted.
>--
>
>[ Steven W. DiFranco, CEO WEBCRAFT Data Resources ][ "For the things
>

I'm sorry, but I cann't resist.

The scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark which you alluded to was NOT what
Spielberg had planned. Originally, Spielberg WANTED a sword/whip fight
between Indy and the large chap. However, there was one slight problem.
Harrison Ford was having some trouble with the end part of his digestive
system, and he was constantly running between takes to go to the bathroom. A
long, drawn out fight as the director wanted wouldn't have been possible.
Instead, Indy draws his gun, and the rest is history. Using this as an
example of a creatoe knowingly setting up the audience for one solution and
then pulling another doesn't quite work out.

As for Into the Fire, I don't mind the way the Shadow War
ended--considering what was established, it was one of the few ways it could
end. What I objected to in this episode was that the writing just couldn't
cut it. Sheridan's speech had to be Homeric, cathartic. He had to be able to
convince the Shadows and Vorlons to end their conflict which had been going on
for millenia. It had to be more powerful than the sacrifices of the two alien
ships (one of which SHOULD have been a major characters, simply for the added
effect). Sheridan's speech had to be sublime. It just wasn't. I didn't want
a great CGI battle. Considering the build up given to this conflict, it's
ending needed to be great. It just wasn't. The writing wasn't there. The
acting wasn't there. It was a shame that the Centauri B-story was handled
better, and that was because it gave the viewer what was needed. The rush of
watching Lando's soldiers blast the two shadows; the destruction of the
island; and, despite the flashback, Morden's head on a pike. All in all, this
episode was average, much like this season.


Robert Holland

unread,
Mar 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/16/97
to

> The scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark which you alluded to was NOT what
> Spielberg had planned. Originally, Spielberg WANTED a sword/whip fight
> between Indy and the large chap. However, there was one slight problem.
> Harrison Ford was having some trouble with the end part of his digestive
> system, and he was constantly running between takes to go to the bathroom. A
> long, drawn out fight as the director wanted wouldn't have been possible.
> Instead, Indy draws his gun, and the rest is history. Using this as an
> example of a creatoe knowingly setting up the audience for one solution and
> then pulling another doesn't quite work out.

So, the funniest bit in Indiana Jones happened because the lead
had diarrhea? That would explain the Alan Quartermain film imitation--
the writer had diarrhea.

--RH

Richard Bergstresser

unread,
Mar 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/16/97
to

Steven W. DiFranco wrote:
>
> I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was
> a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in
> dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
> their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
> viewers of any good magician. The setup is always supposed to be
> surprising in its conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the
> writer/director went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the
> bull-whip. Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
> sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a whip
> fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story surprising, when it
> does not go as predicted.

C'mon on! The Shadow War ending WAS predictable. The problem wasn't no BOOM,
or that we were suprised. The problem was wrapping up 1000's of years of conflict
with 5 minutes of weak dialogue. That's what we are complaining about.

William December Starr

unread,
Mar 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/16/97
to

In article <333dc6bd...@news.earthlink.net>,
ori...@earthlink.net (orionca) said:

> Actually, Indy WAS supposed to take out the swordsman with his
> whip. Unfortunately, Harrison Ford wasn't quite good enough with
> a whip and kept blowing take after take. Finally, after about
> 10-15 failed attempts to snap the sword out of the Arab's hand
> with his whip, on the next take Harrison said, "Ah, the hell with
> it!", whipped out his revolver, and shot. Speilburg et al yelled,
> "CUT" and stood around staring at each other for a while, before
> someone finally said, "Well, that IS what Indiana Jones would
> do..." and rewrote it into the script.

I hope by "and shot" you meant "and pointed the gun at the other guy
and said "BANG!" or something. Ford's too intelligent, I think, to
ever point a gun at someone and actually pull the trigger unless the
(1) scene calls for it and (2) the production's weapons master has
explicitly set up the weapon and personally handed it to him. (And
if Ford _was_ sufficiently delirious from the heat to do such a
thing, all that would happen anyway would probably be a click, as no
weapons master is ever going to rig a gun with blanks for a scene in
which the weapons isn't supposed to even be drawn, let alone fired.)

The version of the story that I heard, for what it's worth, was that
the originally planned bullwhip-versus-sword fight was dropped
because Ford, who actually got to be pretty good with the whip, had
had dysentery and wasn't physically up to doing all the derring-do
on the day scheduled for the shot, so somebody -- possibly Ford --
suggested that Jones just shoot the guy.

William December Starr

unread,
Mar 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/16/97
to

In article <332B0C...@apk.net>,

"Steven W. DiFranco" <s...@apk.net> said:

> I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated
> fight was a disappointment, but I disagree.

So do I. It wasn't the absence of a big space battle that was
disappointing; it was the absence of a satisfying resolution to a
major storyline.

> The Vorlons and Shadows were in dereliction of duty for the last
> few millenia. They had lost sight of their true goals, and many
> viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the viewers of any good
> magician. The setup is always supposed to be surprising in its
> conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the writer/director
> went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the bull-whip.
> Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
> sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a
> whip fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story
> surprising, when it does not go as predicted.

That scene in "Raiders of the Lost Ark," like a good magic trick,
had a satisfying payoff which made the audience feel that it had
been misdirected for a good, entertaining cause.

"Into the Fire" just had an "And then the author waved his hands
and made the problem go away" payoff. Bleah, says I.

Ian J. Ball

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

In article <5gil46$8...@crl7.crl.com>, wds...@crl.com (William December
Starr) wrote:

> "Into the Fire" just had an "And then the author waved his hands
> and made the problem go away" payoff. Bleah, says I.

And "Ditto", says me...

Matt Ackeret

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

In article <5gil46$8...@crl7.crl.com>,

William December Starr <wds...@crl.com> wrote:
>In article <332B0C...@apk.net>,
>"Steven W. DiFranco" <s...@apk.net> said:
>> conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the writer/director
>> went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the bull-whip.
>> Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
>> sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a
>> whip fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story
>> surprising, when it does not go as predicted.
>That scene in "Raiders of the Lost Ark," like a good magic trick,

The scene in "Raiders" was not intended to be done that way. There was
a big long choreographed fight with the whip, but Harrison Ford wasn't
getting as good as he thought he should be, so he ad libbed shooting
the guy.
--
mat...@apple.com

Anthony Renaud

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

William December Starr wrote:
> The version of the story that I heard, for what it's worth, was that
> the originally planned bullwhip-versus-sword fight was dropped
> because Ford, who actually got to be pretty good with the whip, had
> had dysentery and wasn't physically up to doing all the derring-do
> on the day scheduled for the shot, so somebody -- possibly Ford --
> suggested that Jones just shoot the guy.

I also heard this version of the story during a special on Speilberg on
the Discovery channel, and I recall it was Ford who suggested he just
shoot the guy.


-Tony

Richard Nelson

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

In article <332B0C...@apk.net> "Steven W. DiFranco" <s...@apk.net> writes:

>I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was

>a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in

>dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
>their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
>viewers of any good magician. The setup is always supposed to be

>surprising in its conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the

>writer/director went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the
>bull-whip. Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a huge
>sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a whip
>fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story surprising, when it
>does not go as predicted.

The problem wasn't that there was misdirection, it was what we were
misdirected into. What we got was stupidity. From Sheridans poor
tactics (Oh, they're fighting each other, lets make them both attack
us while they're still at full strength). To Lorien's idiotic
musings ("The universe decided we shouldn't be immortal..."). Ugh,
give me a break. And of course the Vorlons and Shadows:

Sheridan: Hey you guys are being stupid!
V&S: WAAAAAH Johnny called us stupid!
Daddy take us away from here. Sniff.

These were supposed to be advanced races, and we got dumb and
dumber. If I wanted to see stupid characers doing and saying stupid
things, I'd watch Friends. And before anyone else comments that I
was just hoping for a cgi battle that didn't happen, let me point
out that there *was* a big cgi battle. There was just a resolution
that made much of the prevous 3 years a pointless waste of time.

BTW, if the final scene of the final episode was a shot of Ivonova
waking up and saying "What a wild dream." would you think it a
magical misdirection? It would be a surprize, but it would still
suck.

Rick

--
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________.sig____________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
The generic .sig Richard Nelson rble...@ucsd.edu

Gharlane of Eddore

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

"AL" <=> Attribution Lost
AL> The scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark which you alluded to was NOT what
AL> Spielberg had planned. Originally, Spielberg WANTED a sword/whip fight
AL> between Indy and the large chap. However, there was one slight problem.
AL> Harrison Ford was having some trouble with the end part of his digestive
AL> system, and he was constantly running between takes to go to the bathroom.
AL> A long, drawn out fight as the director wanted wouldn't have been possible.
AL> Instead, Indy draws his gun, and the rest is history. Using this as an
AL> example of a creatoe knowingly setting up the audience for one solution
AL> and then pulling another doesn't quite work out.


In <332C68...@wco.com> Robert Holland <rhol...@wco.com> writes:
>
> So, the funniest bit in Indiana Jones happened because the lead
> had diarrhea?


The version I heard was that Harrison Ford and the stunt guy with the
sword worked it out in advance, but hadn't told anyone what they were
going to do, including the director. Of course, this is strictly
hearsay, so take it with a grain of salt.

> That would explain the Alan Quartermain film imitation--
> the writer had diarrhea.

The name in the title of the two Golan-Globus efforts was "QUATERMAIN,"
not "Quartermain." To this day I think the only thing they did that
was really criminally wrong was to cast Richard Chamberlain in the lead.
Allan Quatermain should be played by someone who's a bit more of an
Old Africa Hand in appearance... Chamberlain will always have the
air of Doctor Kildare about him.

I've lost track of how many different movie versions there have been
of certain of the classic Quatermain adventures, but they started
in silent films, and with any luck, won't ever stop.
There are something like two dozen volumes of the Allan Quatermain
stories extant, and "NADA THE LILY," the novel about Umslopogaas,
the Zulu hero-king, would make a pretty good movie all by itself.

H. Rider Haggard was a proximate source for most of the adventure
novels of the first quarter of this century, a primary source for
many of the schticks that E.R. Burroughs recycled in "TARZAN"
novels, and was so well regarded that Rudyard Kipling worked with
him on a few scenarios and texts..... and Haggard was knighted in
1912 (at age 56) primarily for his novels (although his service to
the Crown in Africa was certainly exemplary and respectable.)


Note: Golan-Globus did a strange bit of casting in the "CITY OF GOLD"
movie. The red-haired vixen queen, who has almost zero lines, just a
mostly-bare body, and is last seen plummeting into the lava, was played
by "Elvira, Mistress Of The Dark," better known as Cassandra Peterson.


Benjamin James Lomax

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

Richard Nelson wrote:
>
> In article <332B0C...@apk.net> "Steven W. DiFranco" <s...@apk.net> writes:
>
> >I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was
> >a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in
> >dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
> >their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
> >viewers of any good magician. The setup is always supposed to be
> >surprising in its conclusion.
>
> The problem wasn't that there was misdirection, it was what we were
> misdirected into. What we got was stupidity. From Sheridans poor
> tactics (Oh, they're fighting each other, lets make them both attack
> us while they're still at full strength).

This is only stupid if you think that Sheridan wanted the Vorlons and
Shadows to kill each other, which he obviously did not. Would there
have been a difference if he had waited? Not really, but perhaps they
would have decided that fighting each other was not what it was about,
which seemed to be their opinion previously to this. If so, all that
preparation by the AoL would have been for naught. Sheridan couldn't
take that chance.

> To Lorien's idiotic
> musings ("The universe decided we shouldn't be immortal..."). Ugh,

Not particularly deep, but important to the way that JMS has developed
his universe. Just because it doesn't agree with your philosophy doesn't
make it idiotic.

> give me a break. And of course the Vorlons and Shadows:
>
> Sheridan: Hey you guys are being stupid!
> V&S: WAAAAAH Johnny called us stupid!

When did this dialogue take place? I have thought for some time that
maybe this episode aired differently in other people's homes, so
this must prove it. In the ep. that I watched, nothing remotely
similar to this took place.

> Daddy take us away from here. Sniff.
>

They asked him to go with them, not take them away and if they
weren't already childish, how do you explain their motivations
up until now? The whole point, that it seems some people have
not picked up on, was that if the S's and V's had developed
sufficient maturity, they would have left with the rest of the
First Ones. They were technologically far superior, but they
hadn't developed enough to know what to do with it, so they
played games with the lesser races. It wasn't just the lesser
races throwing off the yoke, it was the growth of the Vorlons
and the Shadows as well.



> These were supposed to be advanced races, and we got dumb and
> dumber. If I wanted to see stupid characers doing and saying stupid

I believe if you pay attention to the earlier episodes, this,
what you call stupidity, has been well developed. That pseudo-deep
crap that the Vorlons threw out was transparent and the Shadows
never appeared advanced in any way other than technological. I
really don't get people that are amazed with how the S's and V's
turned out. We had all the clues we needed, people!

> things, I'd watch Friends. And before anyone else comments that I
> was just hoping for a cgi battle that didn't happen, let me point
> out that there *was* a big cgi battle. There was just a resolution
> that made much of the prevous 3 years a pointless waste of time.
>

The fact that you, and others, say that proves that you weren't
watching those previous three years very closely. Firstly, JMS
has said, for those who weren't paying attention, that B5 is not
about the Shadow War, it is about the development of the characters
on B5! Also, much of the previous three years, even if constrained
to developing the Shadow War, which it wasn't, was laboriously
constructed for just this ending. JMS wrote all of this stuff
years ago in his head, to say that he was dismissing it all is
just plain ignorant.



> BTW, if the final scene of the final episode was a shot of Ivonova
> waking up and saying "What a wild dream." would you think it a
> magical misdirection? It would be a surprize, but it would still
> suck.
>

That would be true, but nothing similar to what we did get. Even
those who don't have any idea what is going on would have to
agree with that.

Ben

P.S. I'm just about through with finals, so all the flames by
those who feel insulted by the above, as they should, are
welcome to respond.

Maro Adams

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

Matt Ackeret wrote:

> The scene in "Raiders" was not intended to be done that way. There was
> a big long choreographed fight with the whip, but Harrison Ford wasn't
> getting as good as he thought he should be, so he ad libbed shooting
> the guy.

I loved that scene. :)

Junsok Yang

unread,
Mar 17, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/17/97
to

In article <332CB9...@erols.com>, rich...@erols.com says...

>C'mon on! The Shadow War ending WAS predictable. The problem wasn't no
BOOM,
>or that we were suprised. The problem was wrapping up 1000's of years of
conflict
>with 5 minutes of weak dialogue. That's what we are complaining about.

Agreed. For all the lauded ability of B5 to set up future events, they
didn't set up *THE* future event they needed to set up.

--
****************************************************************
"We tend to love in dark corners and hate in a large
crowd."...Kim Huber CNN Sports (CNN HN 7/28/96)

Junsok Yang (yan...@yalevm.cis.yale.edu)


Franklin Hummel

unread,
Mar 18, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/18/97
to

In article <IJBall-1303971537080001@mac_rbk_3.chem.ucla.edu>,

Ian J. Ball <IJB...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>3) the replacing of the superior Michael Landes as Jimmy with that damn
> annoying kid!


I also cannot stand the guy now playing "Olson". In fact,
whenever I watch LOIS AND CLARK now and he appears, I channel-surf until
he is gone. (I gave up on last Sunday's episode where he was a major
part of the storyline and just watched something else.)

I recall reading when he was picked as the new Olson that this was
in part due to a similarity in appearance to Jonathan Brandise(?) on the
then-still-on SEAQUEST. -That- just shows now L&C had taken a wrong turn
and was heading in a bad direction.

-- Franklin Hummel [ hum...@world.std.com ]
--
====================================================================
* NecronomiCon, 3rd Edition: The Cthulhu Mythos Convention *
15-17 August 1997, Providence, Rhode Island
Visit our NEW web site at: http://www.necropress.com/necronomicon

Doug Mertaugh

unread,
Mar 19, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/19/97
to

Richard Bergstresser <rich...@erols.com> wrote:

>Steven W. DiFranco wrote:
>>
>> I have heard many people complain that the greatly anticipated fight was
>> a disappointment, but I disagree. The Vorlons and Shadows were in
>> dereliction of duty for the last few millenia. They had lost sight of
>> their true goals, and many viewers fell for JMS's misdirection, as do the
>> viewers of any good magician.

He foreshadowed the fact that they had lost sight of their
purpose (or had a faulty one to begin with) for several
episodes, since at least Sheridan's trip to Za'ha'dum. The
only "misdirection" was making us believe the war would
end realistically.

The setup is always supposed to be

>> surprising in its conclusion. In the first Indiana Jones movie the
>> writer/director went ti great pains to show Indy's prowess with the
>> bull-whip. Then, in the market scene where he was confronted by a
huge
>> sword-wielding giant of a man - and the audience was primed for a whip
>> fight - Indy shoots him. This is what makes a story surprising, when it
>> does not go as predicted.

That you compare that to the Shadow War says a lot in itself.
The Indy Jones scene you describe was done as a comedy scene,
funny by being unsuspected. Surprise and lack of predictability
are fine as long as the conclusion makes sense, which this
one didn't.

Mac

unread,
Mar 19, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/19/97