Jump to content

Babylon 5


AverageGuy

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Shryke' post='1744383' date='Apr 4 2009, 00.56']On rewatch, Season 1 isn't THAT bad. The main problem is some of the horrendous guest actors.

There's quite a few decent episodes in there though.[/quote]Yes, although I didn't like the episode David Warner was in (the brain-wiping squid episode with the toy-maker from Blade Runner), I did like David Warner in that episode. Then again, I'm a fan of a number of the guest actors. That episode for example had David Warner, the toy-maker from Blade Runner, and the guy who plays Father Brennen in the show Father Ted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Wert suggests, I think there's a difference between Byron being annoying, and Byron as acted being annoying. I'm afraid the actor, and the direction he received, plus some of JMS's less stellar monologues that he handed him, are more to blame.

The concept was fine, the execution was not so great.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ran' post='1744485' date='Apr 4 2009, 02.23']As Wert suggests, I think there's a difference between Byron being annoying, and Byron as acted being annoying. I'm afraid the actor, and the direction he received, plus some of JMS's less stellar monologues that he handed him, are more to blame.

The concept was fine, the execution was not so great.[/quote]
Oh, Ran. You adorable-type cult leader!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm making Ben watch this for the first time at the moment (we've got as far as A Race Through Dark Places) - he is NOT a Trek fan and is still put off by the bad acting and cheesy dialogue, but I keep swearing that it gets sooo much better - it's embarrassing having to sit through the gurning of the awful guest actors with someone who is still not convinced of the show's quality...

Next up is [b]The Coming of Shadows[/b] though. :drool:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='AverageGuy' post='1461687' date='Jul 30 2008, 02.25']There were some good actors. The two main aliens, the one ambassador with all the hair and the other one with the spots, the Narn, actually seemed to do a decent job.[/quote]
And that is the best reason to watch Babylon 5.

That, and the ridiculous shortage of halfway decent scifi TV.

I disagree with those who say it gets much better. The production is poor throughout, and the only increase in quality is directly in proportion to the screen time and development of the aforementioned ambassadors. Okay, Bruce Boxleitner was an improvement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Jaqen the FatManderly' post='1747431' date='Apr 6 2009, 17.03']I disagree with those who say it gets much better. The production is poor throughout, and the only increase in quality is directly in proportion to the screen time and development of the aforementioned ambassadors. Okay, Bruce Boxleitner was an improvement.[/quote]

As the arc takes center stage, the quality of the plot improves dramatically as well. The actual arc is a really good story and there is not as much of it season one as in two, three and four.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is mainly because Season 1 serves as a sort of introduction that just shows the viewer the general context of the show: power dynamics between the nations, character dynamics, prevalent issues and organizations (i.e. Psi Corps), and small dabbles of history.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm rewatching with my girlfriend as she decided to see this show that I maintain is still better than BSG or farscape.
Now, I'll admit the years have not been kind on the show in terms of production and dialogue but back then TV wasn't as sophisticated as we have now. One thing that does annoy me is the show always has people walking around or pretending to be shopping to make exposition more engaging. With stronger actors, as in BSG, the directors don't need such sleight of hand tactics. The actors playing Londo and G'Kar were excellent though and in many ways they were the most human in the show (I felt G'Kars betrayal at the hands of Londo as much as I felt Londo's guilt at the betrayal).
I have to admit that season 1 is a slog (the first time around I started with season 2). Watching it having seen the rest of the show is an education though as it is clear right from the start that the show knew exactly where it was going. All the references to the shadows, Londo and G'Kar's futures and the minbari connection to mankind was all laid down in the first season. The only glitch is the removal of Sinclair, which I suspect was then grafted onto Sheridan (Can anyone confirm this?). The reason I think this is because Sheridan's wife sounded exactly the same as Sinclair's girlfriend. I also think Delenn married Sinclair in the ceremony at the start of the show as well.
I'm onto season 3 again and it's good to be watching a show that knows where it's going and how it's going to get there. Season 4 in my opinion was one of the best seasons of a sci-fi show ever (season 2 of Galactica is fairly close along with season 2 of Farscape).
You could probably do your friend a favour though and spare him season 5 and all of the mini-movies, excluding "in the beginning".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='red snow' post='1749392' date='Apr 8 2009, 09.46']Watching it having seen the rest of the show is an education though as it is clear right from the start that the show knew exactly where it was going. All the references to the shadows, Londo and G'Kar's futures and the minbari connection to mankind was all laid down in the first season. [b]The only glitch is the removal of Sinclair, which I suspect was then grafted onto Sheridan (Can anyone confirm this?). [/b]The reason I think this is because Sheridan's wife sounded exactly the same as Sinclair's girlfriend. I also think Delenn married Sinclair in the ceremony at the start of the show as well.[/quote]

This is actually a more difficult question than it seems. The question is: which version of the story are you talking about? In some ways the question is very simple. In none of the versions was Sheridan simply dropped into Sinclair's story arc.

From the bonus volume of the cafepress scriptbooks we have the story alluded to in the treatment that JMS took from studio to studio trying to sell it, dated September 1988; we also have the 5-year arc as told in the 8 pages that JMS wrote prior to season 1 and only showed to Michale O'Hare and maybe a few others, probably written summer 1993. We also have the writer's bible that JMS gives to any writers he wants to let try sell him a story for the show in season 1. There are big differences between all three, but very little of the major stuff we saw from the beginning of season 3 to the end of season 5 was in the pre-season 1 Sinclair-centered arc.

Yes, JMS had a tight control on the story, but when he saw the need to redevelop the themes of the story in certain way he immediately rewrote the arc, without losing control of the story.

Very little of Sinclair's arc was transferred to Sheridan. About the only thing specific I can pinpoint is the season 2 finale as being identical. Those scenes with Kosh revealed in angel form to save Sinclair from falling were specifically described in the arc. After that, much of the broad story elements were radically different. The arc with the Narn-Centauri war is about the same with the Shadow helping Londo in secret. Londo's development post-3rd season is not as nuanced. Narn is not liberated, nor is the Cartagia story line present. G'kar disappears for a season and half as a rebel leader on the homeworld. The Shadows were supposed to mind-rape Catherine Sakai, leaving her an empty shell, and Sinclair turning to Delenn in his hour of despair, and them hooking up, as she intended. Both the Shadow war and the Earth Civil war NEVER happens during the original B5 arc. Instead what we get in year 5 is Londo (as Emperor) and the Shadows framing Sinclair for the mass-murder of most of the Vorlons (who lived in a hundred-mile long spaceship), a Minbari coup resulting with the warrior caste on top and destroying Babylon 5 in the finale, while Sinclair and Delenn escape with their infant child and Garibaldi. And then that's it. Series over. Earth is hated by Minbari, Vorlons, Centauri, Shadows, all the other races (perhaps even the Narn, that wasn't specified), and everyone including Earthgov wants to hunt down Sinclair.

The arc goes on for another page and half describing BABYLON PRIME, a follow-on series where we see the Sinclair and Delenn stealing B4 to use as a base to fight the Shadow war, pulling it forward in time (unspecified number of years). Garibaldi and some Narn sent by G´kar (a relative of his) would be there to help.

Notice so far no mention of Rangers or Valen; nor anything about the Vorlons and Shadows representing order and chaos and warring through proxies for millions of years, and no telepath arc. Those were never part of the original arc, not even for B-Prime. The only thing described is the flipside of the Babylon Squared story, explaining how the time jumping effects were causing Sinclair, Delenn and son to prematurely age. The son grows rapidly, but innocently, so becomes a religious figure to the galaxy.

Londo's keeper is described, and gets his redemption in B-Prime by freeing Sinclair and Delenn after their capture, resulting in Londo's death (I presume the idea that G´kar kills him is intact, but that is not specified) . The Shadows are defeated, then the Minbari warrior caste, and Sinclair's name is cleared for the mass-murder of the Vorlons. Sinclair's son leads the new interstellar alliance, and Sinclair retires to some green world to go fishing (I´m not kidding).

So what I think happened was JMS realised he would not get 10 years and two series to tell this story. So he brought the Shadow war forward to the B5 story, and in order to do that he was forced to split B5 from Earthgov. He probably also realised it would be insane to get rid of G´Kar for a season and a half since the actor was so good, thus the Citizen G´kar story was born. In the original treatment he specifically says no war would ever be shown in the B5 series, just that it would lead up to war in a possibly follow-on series. This was simply to sell the show, and I think he had every intention of keeping that promise, but once the first season starting airing and fans started speculating about the plot, he had to rethink his arc. I'm guessing he also realised even with only 800k per episode in the budget he could stretch the dollars to tell the larger story of the Shadow war and the Earth civil war, and didn't have to pray for a bigger budget in a second series.

So, could he have done this new arc with Sinclair? Sinclair did not have the connections in Earthforce to pull off the civil war arc. Sinclair had been written as an outsider, and an insider was needed. Babylon 4 was not anymore needed for a future war that would result in the interstellar alliance, so why not send it to the past? He could have kept that (War Without End) for the series finale, but I think he was also concerned he wouldn't get a 5th season to tell it, so pushed it to the 3rd season. Sinclair wasn't really needed from much between Babylon Squared and War Without End, so why not bring in a character who could have more at stake in the Shadow War and the Earth civil war storylines? From what I understand, and maybe I am wrong or misremember, JMS had considered having both Sinclair and Sheridan as characters on the show, Sheridan as military governor of B5, and Sinclair as ambassador on the council. That would have left each of them only half a story to do, so probably that was unsatisfactory, and he couldn't afford to pay for both of them anyway. Ultimately, it might have just been a gamble on JMS's part, knowing O'Hare didn't really want to stick around for five seasons let alone ten, the decision to go with Sheridan was probably the least risky.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aye, he has said in a few spots that Sheridan (the character) was something he'd been considering for awhile, as he felt loading the "Shadow War General/IA President" stuff on top of Sinclair's Earh-Mimbari war past would have felt like too much stuff on one character to feel realistic. So he was thinking of bringing in another character to cover that, and when O'Hare wanted out, it gave him an opening that solved those issues.

Really, the more you find out about the writing of B5, the more obvious it is that peoples praise of the show for having a definite plan and sticking to it is bullshit. JMS's strenght with B5 lay in being flexible enough to create the series despite large changes, while still remiaing coherent and within the themes and stories he wanted to tell. And even those themes and stories changed as the series took shape.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

B5 would be the finest example of focusing on character while not copping out on the plot, unlike some series I could name. The characters had their arcs which drove the plot, and but the plot could change to serve the interest of the large themes JMS wanted to write about.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SpaceChampion' post='1752095' date='Apr 11 2009, 06.36']B5 would be the finest example of focusing on character while not copping out on the plot, unlike some series I could name. The characters had their arcs which drove the plot, and but the plot could change to serve the interest of the large themes JMS wanted to write about.[/quote]

Thanks for all the background SpaceChampion! I'm starting to get the impression JMS could write a really interesting book on the making of this show. Maybe there is one?
I sometimes wish that a show could get greenlit where JMS is a showrunner but with some other guys who could rein in the "comedy" touches eg one of the BSG guys or Lost (who can do funny). I just rewatched an episode where a sideplot was the B5 computer turning into a grumpy new yawker and while I can see why he mayne wanted to lighten the mood, it really did not fit with the tone of the episode. There's other examples too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was Harlan Ellison voicing the rude computer, BTW. ;)

Fascinating reading, again. I think JMS's most important idea is that he was writing a story with beginning, middle, and end, and he didn't have this notion of just stringing the story along for as long as he could as many shows do. So given that framework, it's no surprise that he was able to change plot and character threads when he knew he had a specific destination: the five year story. Whose story, we see, changes radically in the course of production, but still, having "Year 5" as his goal would help focus him.

It could be argued that Lost has improved markedly in part because they now have a definite end point, as well, and the writers can now plan towards that end.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Ran' post='1752156' date='Apr 11 2009, 11.40']That was Harlan Ellison voicing the rude computer, BTW. ;)

It could be argued that Lost has improved markedly in part because they now have a definite end point, as well, and the writers can now plan towards that end.[/quote]

I agree that Lost was saved from going down the drain mid-season 3 when the writers knew how long they had left. It didn't quite work as well for BSG though. I also like the one season - one arc approach of shows like Buffy and the Wire too as that gives focus and creative leeway too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='red snow' post='1752146' date='Apr 11 2009, 05.01']Thanks for all the background SpaceChampion! I'm starting to get the impression JMS could write a really interesting book on the making of this show. Maybe there is one?[/quote]

Essentially, he has, which is where I got all that information. About 30-60 pages out of each volume of the 15 volume "The Scripts of J. Michael Straczynski" tell it episode by episode, plus with an intro that usually talks about things that affected the overall season, or a particular experience he had in his younger days that was reflected in the series, the infamous weekend at a UK convention where all the actors except Claudia Christian signed on for season 5, or the story of the B5 movie Memory of Shadows that didn't happen, how hard the deaths of Andreas Katsulas and Richard Biggs hit him and the cast, and how though he was offered by WB to do a theatrical movie, he couldn't think of doing one with G'Kar and Franklin, so we got The Lost Tales instead, etc.

Since it was a cafepress one-time printing, these aren't available any more, but you might fight them on ebay. A number of people bought extra copies of the complete script sets specifically to put on ebay. If you bought all fourteen, the 15th with the the 5-year arc, the treatment, and the writer's bible was the bonus volume.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SpaceChampion' post='1752076' date='Apr 11 2009, 05.38']So what I think happened was JMS realised he would not get 10 years and two series to tell this story. So he brought the Shadow war forward to the B5 story, and in order to do that he was forced to split B5 from Earthgov. He probably also realised it would be insane to get rid of G´Kar for a season and a half since the actor was so good, thus the Citizen G´kar story was born. In the original treatment he specifically says no war would ever be shown in the B5 series, just that it would lead up to war in a possibly follow-on series. This was simply to sell the show, and I think he had every intention of keeping that promise, but once the first season starting airing and fans started speculating about the plot, he had to rethink his arc. I'm guessing he also realised even with only 800k per episode in the budget he could stretch the dollars to tell the larger story of the Shadow war and the Earth civil war, and didn't have to pray for a bigger budget in a second series.[/quote]

I'm also wondering how much of the two-series arc is a hold-over from JMS plan to do two separate series, one as a small character-focused piece mostly taking place on one space station and the other as a larger epic war story. It sounds like his first thought was to somewhat combine the two into the same universe, and then merged the two into one five-season story. The original arc does sound impressive, but not entirely a realistic proposition.

[quote]From what I understand, and maybe I am wrong or misremember, JMS had considered having both Sinclair and Sheridan as characters on the show, Sheridan as military governor of B5, and Sinclair as ambassador on the council. That would have left each of them only half a story to do, so probably that was unsatisfactory, and he couldn't afford to pay for both of them anyway.[/quote]

This was the original plan in the pilot. A line cut from the pilot would have revealed that Sinclair was merely the station commander and there was a full-time ambassador who'd gone home to Earth for an emergency operation, leaving Sinclair in charge.

In the [i]Midnight on the Firing Line [/i]'JMS Speaks' article on the Lurker's Guide (the closest we had to podcasts at the time), he said he dropped the notion because it was yet another regular or recurring character to introduce and develop backstory for, give lines to, have them doing something in the arc etc. So they papered over that idea even though it wasn't very credible that a military governor would also be serving as the representative of a democratic civilian government. Fanwank has it that the Minbari insisted on him being on the council as well as being in charge of the station, and during Sheridan's tenure the idea was pushed forward more than B5 was a military outpost first and foremost rather than a civilian colony, probably to explain this point a bit more.

[quote]Ultimately, it might have just been a gamble on JMS's part, knowing O'Hare didn't really want to stick around for five seasons let alone ten, the decision to go with Sheridan was probably the least risky.[/quote]

The 'real' reason why O'Hare left [b]B5[/b] will probably never be revealed, but in interviews during the early days, O'Hare seemed to indicate he did want to stick around for the duration. JMS then came up with this story that O'Hare was not used to the rigiours of weekly television and after a year had indicated a preference to go back to stage acting in New York, which fit in with JMS' own struggles over giving new storyline elements to Sinclair that stretched credulity. Conspiracy theorists have other explanations ranging from the mild (Warner Brothers wanted a bigger name and a more charismatic lead) to the tabloid (one of the other actors pointblank refused to do any more scenes with O'Hare, leading to Warner Brothers suggesting JMS drop him). More likely it was somewhere between them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...