GREEN MEDDLER'S JMS on CompuServe 12/21/95

DeAnna Miller dmille12 at ix.netcom.com
Thu Dec 21 18:26:50 EST 1995


Hi Folks!

Many of you have expressed an interest in seeing the posts
FROM others TO JMS in these posts.  The reason they are not is
that these posts are also sent to archivers, who, for legal
reasons, cannot archive the posts of others.  I have tried to
summarize the posts of others in the {regarding} area, but
this has proved insufficient for some.  I understand that
someone else is also posting these, including the posts from
others to JMS.  If this is not the case, I am sure *someone*
will let me know, about it!

This time I have included some quotes from the posts of others
inside JMS's messages.  It is lengthy, but I hope this helps.


Subj:  Ds9 Cancellation Rumor       Section: Star Trek: DS9
  To:  Colin Knowles   Wednesday, December 20, 1995 6:28:29 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419339

      {regarding why Paramount doesn't move DS9 to UPN}

     I don't know for certain, but I'd suspect that there are
contractual elements  prohibiting this.  UPN is an alliance
between Paramount and Chris Craft  Television; at this point,
CCT is paying virtually all the money for developing and 
airing the shows, with Paramount contractually able to buy 50%
of the network  sometime in the next year or so.  (This per
the trades and reports in industry  business journals.)

     DS9 is currently owned exclusively by Paramount.  Many of
the stations that  currently air DS9 are not necessarily part
of the UPN network; some are Tribune  stations, or other
independents.  If they made it part of UPN, they would then 
have to shuffle around a lot of stations, and might end up
losing better time slots  and it's a *lot* of hassle.  And
Paramount would have to be willing to turn over  partial
ownership of DS9 to Chris Craft (here I'm guessing), and they
may not  want to do that, may possibly not be *able* to do so
by contract.

     It's a very confusing corporate web, not that unlike the
situation which basically  prevents B5 from going to the WB
network.

      jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Gerald Himmelein   Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:03
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418138

      <quoting Gerald Himmelein to JMS>:

      >Meaning that originally, Garibaldi was going to be shot
      >at by Laurel and since  she dropped out after The
      >Gathering, you used Garibaldi's second in command  as
      >a trap door? Very nicely done.

     Correct, had Laurel stayed with the station, it would've
been she who pulled  the trigger on Garibaldi.

         jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  John McAuley     Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:05:04 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418804

      <quoting John McAuley to JMS>:

      >Would Laurel have been a PsiCorps-personality-implant-
      >mole?

     Yes, Laurel would've been Control.

         jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  The Jawa / Jawa #2     December 19, 1995 11:05:06 PM 
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418805

      <quoting The Jawa / Jawa #2 to JMS>:

      >Is it true that for awhile, the traitor was going to be
      >Ivanova?

     No, after the thread with Laurel was revealed, lots of
people *assumed* that  that thread had been passed along to
Ivanova.  It had never in fact been intended  for her, but
when it was broached, I simply didn't reply, on the theory
that if I said it  *wasn't* her, it'd narrow it down to who it
*was*.

         jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  The Jawa / Jawa #2     December 20, 1995 6:28:22 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419337

      <quoting The Jawa / Jawa #2 to JMS>:

      >So, like Sheridan, Ivanova wasn't a "replacement"
      >character?

     All the characters are unique; there seems to be this
bone-headed notion, that  I frequently run into, of "Well,
Ivanova's just Takashima renamed," or "Sheridan's  story is
just the same as Sinclair's, same guy just renamed."  They're
*not* and  never have been.  The story of one does not devlove
automatically upon the  other.  If you make a change, it's
because you have something better in  mind...otherwise why
make it?

         jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Robert Miller    Thursday, December 21, 1995 4:07:15 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419589

      <Quotong Robert Miller to JMS>:

      >If Laurel had stayed on the show, would she have
      >received the password by this  point in the story?  Who
      >would then have taken over as second in command? 

     If Laurel *had* stayed with the show, by the middle of
year two the fact that she  was Control would've been revealed
via the password incident. At that point, one  particular
possibility was that her second in command under her -- a
rather dour  Russian lieutenant named Ivanova -- would've been
promoted to take her place,  while Laurel was moved off the
chessboard. (This was planned because we  knew going in that
Tamlyn Tomita had a growing film career, and we probably 
could've only kept her for a couple of years in the best of
circumstances.  So why  not turn that to your advantage?)

     The position now being occupied by Corwin, Ivanova's
second, is the position  that Ivanova would've held (though
more prominently) if Laurel had stayed on.   (And no, Corwin
doesn't now have that arc lurking in the background.)

     See, it's easy to stick to an outline and never diverge
if you're writing  characters in a novel; in a TV show, with
live actors, you have to be flexible, plan  ahead, come up
with contingency plans, and have threads that weave and 
interlock in ways to leave you maximum flexibility while still
proceeding toward  your destination.

         jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  The Jawa / Jawa #2     December 19, 1995 11:14:06 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418813

     "I *liked* Laurel!"

     Well, yes, that's rather the point; tragedy is only
tragedy if it happens to  someone you care about and like.

        jms

Subj:  Chrysalis              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  The Jawa / Jawa #2     December 20, 1995 6:28:26 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419338

      <Quoting The Jawa / Jawa #2 to JMS>:

      >Laurel would not have shot Garibaldi, though, right?

     Yes, Laurel would've shot Garibaldi.

     The tragedy rule is the #1 rule if you're going to make
people care about your  characters.

        jms

Subj:  From jms: info         Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Anita Karve      Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:05 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418139

      {regarding Anita's move from Boston to San Francisco
       and her adoration of the show}

       Thanks.  (And that's quite a long move, and a different
climate.)

         jms

Subj:  From jms: info         Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Bill Sheldon     Tuesday, December 19, 1995 4:46:16 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418230

      <Quoting Bill Sheldon to JMS>:

      >I was at SDCC for your showing of the TLTS, my 
      >favorite episode to date.  <snip>  I saw a  really nice
      >Duck Dodgers animation cell.  Did you get an early 
      >X-mas present  from yourself?

      No, didn't pick up that one, though I thought about it. 
Problem is there's too  MUCH cool stuff at SDCC...which is why
I go every year.

        jms

Subj:  ATTN:JMS <? About B4>  Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Jason Wong       Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:07 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418140

      <Quoting Jason Wong to JMS>:

      >Just curious: is the season 2 ender going to be re-run?
      >I noticed that it was  replaced with the season 3
      >opener at the end of this batch of re-runs, and was 
      >curious as to why.

     Actually, the season 2 opener was "Points of Departure,"
which wasn't rerun in  this batch, but rather "Hunter/Prey,"
chosen because it sets up some stuff in the  next batch of
episodes.

         jms

Subj:  Looking Back and Forward  Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  John M. Kahane   Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:19 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418142

       Jeez...where do I even start with that one...?

       Okay, "how would I evaluate the work that I've done on
the series to this  point."  (I assume this refers to the
scriptwriting part of my duties, rather than the  producing
part.)

       The first season, I think, was pretty fair.  There were
some rough spots here  and there.  There's a thing known to
athletes called getting "in the zone," that's  when you're
absolutely on target, in the groove, whatever jargon you wish
to throw in.  In any first season of a show, no matter howmuch
advance planning  has gone into the thing, there's a shakedown
period as you find out what really  *does* and doesn't work. 
There was a fair amount of that in year one.

       I think I only really popped into the "zone" a few
times, with the first real such  experience being "And the Sky
Full of Stars."  Once I hit it, I was able to find the  target
again a few more times that season, with "Mind War," "Babylon
Squared,"  "Chrysalis" and a couple of others.  But that was
about it.  I was trying to find a  new way of telling a story
for TV, and while I'd been thinking about it for a long  time,
there was never a chance to get in any *practice* because
except for  Power, which had a few arc aspects to it, no other
show WORKS like B5 in this  respect.  So there was still a
learning curve.

       Season two, I think, I started to Get It more often,
and more consistently.  I'd  learned a lot doing year one, and
was able to apply it. I don't think I could've  written "The
Coming of Shadows" in year one, I just hadn't yet acquired the
skills  that ONLY come through practice doing this very
unusual style of storytelling.  I  think I got into the zone
a little faster, with the last four in particular being right
on  the mark, for what I wanted to achieve.

       And as far as season three is concerned...though only
4 have aired, I'm  finishing #17 right now.  I usually gauge
where things are by the reaction the  scripts get around the
set...and this season, more than any other, I've had the 
actors and crew come by just shaking their heads in astonish-
ment at what's  coming down in the pages.  The folks at WB
have made it a point to call and say  that they're loving what
they're seeing in the scripts, and that's unusual.

       Subjectively -- and this opinion is the least valid,
since it's colored by my own  perception -- I think that at
this moment, I'm doing the best work of my career to  date. 
There's something happening in the scripts that...I can't
really define.   There's just something *there* that wasn't
there before, or was there only  sporadically.  The scripts
are completely taking on a life of their own.  (I related 
elsewhere that something very major happened in "Interludes
and Examinations," #15, that was never, ever in the arc, that
I hadn't planned on doing  when I began the script...but the
damned thing just *happened*...and all I could  do was watch
it unfold on the page.)

       Out of 17 to date, the only one that's *slightly*
clunky is "Exogenesis,"  because it's just a little too
straightforward for my tastes. I'd thought it was going  to be
something other than what it was; there's a writing phrase,
"it's too much  what it is."  But it has some great character
moments in it, and I think that  redeems it to some extent.

       But that's it, that's the only one.  "Messages From
Earth" may be, in my view,  the best thing we've ever done. 
And the rest are just nifty.  I'm pleased and proud  and
utterly astonished at how well some of this stuff has come out
this season.

       (I *suspect* that part of the reason for the improve-
ment this season is that  I'm not outlining each episode as
much as before.  I used to sit down and break  out each act in
detail, and then stick pretty strongly to that outline.  Now
I just sit  down, knowing where I have to go with the story,
and write it straight through,  letting the characters take
control from time to time.  It takes a long time to be  able
to trust yourself, your ability, and your characters before
you can do that in a  show; finally I'm there.)

       "what directions do you see the series going in now,
that you might not have  considered back when you first
started?"

       Well, it's hard to say, in large measure because of
what I've reported in the  paragraphs preceding.  The series
has taken on a life of its own now, and while I  know where
it's going, from time to time this great big unweildy beast
throws me  off and goes where it wants.  And I'd be a fool if
I refused to listen to that, and  forced it to comply with
what I'd come up with in 1987.  Because that's the key 
thing that I've come to understand. The structure was written
in 1987/88...and I'm  a much better writer now than I was
then.  I still intend to reach the destination I'd  imagined,
but I've found FAR more interesting ways to get there than I
could've  imagined then. Remember, since 1987 I worked on the
Twilight Zone, Nightmare Classics, Murder She Wrote...I've
learned a lot of stuff and acquired  some tools I didn't have
back then.

       So long answer made short...I think that the main
difference is that the rest of  the story is going to be more
ambitious, more dramatic, more fundamentally  *interesting*
than I had ever hoped for.  And given what was there before,
that's  saying a lot.

       jms

Subj:  Looking Back and Forward  Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Trent K. Johnson Tuesday, December 19, 1995 4:46:16 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418231

      <Quoting Trent K. Johnson to JMS>:

      >One of the many, many things I applaud about your
      >writing is not only the  avoidance of technobabble, but
      >avoiding techno-traps so prevalent in "the other 
      >shows".
      >
      >A case in point from "ST: Voyager":  A writer (or
      >writers) comes up with the idea to  land the ship on a
      >planet. (Earhart episode)  In a subsequent episode we
      >then  get, "Can't transport.  Can't use a shuttle. 
      >Hey!  Let's land.  Uh, we can't because,  uh, yeah, the
      >ground's too soft.  Yeah!  That's it!"
      >
      ><sigh>

     "sigh" indeed....

         jms

Subj:  Looking Back and Forward   Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Philip Hornsey   Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:05:01 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418803

      <quoting Philip Hornsey to JMS>:

      >we have come to the  conclusion, recently, that by the
      >time it is over, B5 *may* be the exception that  proves
      >that general rule.

       Yes, it does feel more like a novel now than anything
else.

       (BTW, "the exception proves the rule" is a bastardiza-
tion of the original Latin  phrase, "exceptio probat regulum"
(from memory), which means "the exception  puts the rule to
the test of proof.")

         jms

Subj:  Looking Back and Forward  Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Tom Knudsen   Wednesday, December 20, 1995 6:28:00 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419340

      <Quoting Tom Knudsen to JMS>:

      >     < (BTW, "the exception proves the rule" is a
      >bastardization of the  original Latin phrase, "exceptio
      >probat regulum" (from memory), which means  "the
      >exception puts the rule to the test of proof.")>
      >
      >     You've been getting a lot of use out of that
      >tidbit of knowledge lately,  haven't you?<G>

       I paid for this college education, and by god I'm going
to use it for SOMEthing.

       Odd that this particular phrase has cropped up so much
in recent weeks.   Another bugaboo of mine is the use of the
word "less" when what the person  means to say is "fewer." 
"There are less people here today."  No, "There are  *fewer*
people here today."  There are very few things about which I
will actually  correct someone in the course of speaking, not
wishing to be overly pedantic...but this is one of them.  The
other is when I see a sign that says FOR  "SALE"...well, is it
for sale or isn't it?

       Anal retentive?  Moi?

        jms

Subj:  <Gethsemane Thought>   Section: Babylon 5: Upcoming
  To:  John M. Kahane   Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:23 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418143

     Actually, Mike Vejar is directing the two-parter, and I'm
absolutely thrilled about  it; Mike's been our mainstay for
some time, and he's just terrific.  (He directed  "Convic-
tions," and "Inquisitor.")

       Adam was great in that he's a *very* serious director
who sits down and  really thinks through the subtext of the
episode, the thematic aspects, the  underlying symbology, and
then sits with the actor and *really* works with them  so that
they fully understand the nuances of the scene.  A lot of TV
direction can  be rushed...you're always under the gun...so
it's rare to find someone who really  takes his time and
prepares the cast.

       "Does the pressure come from within, or does it come
from without and the  reaction of the fans of the series?"

       From within.  There's nothing I've ever seen on any net
that's half as critical of  this show as what's said by we who
make it.  If you try to gauge a show, any  show, and determine
its direction by viewer reactions, you're going to have 
pudding, because there are too many divergent reactions.  It
becomes one  massive committee...and committees are the death
of any creative process.

       I'm making this show, first and foremost, for myself,
on the theory that what I  find interesting, others may also
find of interest.  And I'm a perfectionist.  Also a  pain in
the ass.  Also monomanaical.  Just getting a show this big,
this involved,  this visually complex *made* is a task of
Herculean proportions...let alone  getting it made *well*.

       I've always been a very driven personality; I try never
to settle for second best.   If it can't be done just a little
better than what we did last week, why the hell are  we doing
it?  There *has* to be constant evolution, constant growth,
constant  challenge, or you're dead creatively.  You've got to
be absolutely willing to knock  all your support pins out from
under you, in the belief that your skills will enable  you to
land somewhere interesting on your feet.  The moment you
*stop* taking  that risk...you're finished.  At least, that's
what I feel about it.

       This show is probably my one real chance to leave a
mark that I passed this  way, so it has to be as good as I can
humanly make it.  And nothign will ever get  in the way of
that.

         jms

Subj:  <Gethsemane Thought>   Section: Babylon 5: Upcoming
  To:  Philip Hornsey   Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:05:00 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418802

      <Quoting Philip Hornsey to JMS>:

      >>>> I'm making this show, first and foremost, for
      >myself, on the theory that what I  find interesting,
      >others may also find of interest.
      >
      >ROFLMAO!
      >
      >Joe...
      >
      >I *hate* to tell you this...but worded *slightly
      >differently...that's a Rush Limbaugh  quote...
      >
      >I will now flee the country and leave no forwarding
      >address.

     Be advised that the only thing standing between you and
the abyss is my  assumption that you're making this up....

       jms

Subj:  Franklin's Stims       Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  John M. Kahane   Monday, December 18, 1995 11:36:19 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418145

     Stims are a prescription drug, which makes it perfect
fodder for abuse by  doctors (which includes Drs Rosen and
Franklin).  And yes, Franklin has been  getting increasingly
cranky of late for reasons related to stims.

         jms

Subj:  Mo Mosely              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  David Chandler-Gick    December 19, 1995 4:46:15 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418229

      <Quoting David Chandler-Gick to JMS>:

      >What was your initial reaction to finding out about Mr.
      >Doyle's "embellished"  resume, and how did you "deal"
      >with it?

      Well, I just kinda figured it fit in perfectly with the
character; that's something  Garibaldi would've done....

         jms

Subj:  Mo Mosely              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  John McAuley     Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:05:09 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418806

      <Quoting John McAuley to JMS>:

      >Did you find out before you hired him?

     I found out the day he came in; I looked down and saw on
his resume "Dance  Theater of Harlem," and said "What the heck
is this?  Hey you, DANCE."  Since  then, he's forgotten this,
and continues to insist that nobody ever caught onto his 
little ploy.

      jms

Subj:  Thank you, sir.        Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  David Belt       Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:05:11 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418807

      <Quoting David Belt to JMS>:

      >I want to say thank you.  I showed my 12-13 year old
      >deacons "Passing Through  Gethsemane" on Wednesday
      >night.  Other than my son (who is an avid fan),  none
      >of them watch the series.  In fact, other than my son,
      >all of them say that  they don't like the series at all
      >(in the less than imaginative and colorful ways that 
      >boys that age have of disparaging that which they have
      >never tried.)
      
      <snip>
      
      >The other adult present (who had never seen  the show)
      >taught the lesson to the deacons quorum on Sunday and
      >made several references to the show.  It was a great
      >experience.

     Then perhaps the next sermon/lesson should be on the sin
of prejudging  something before actually being exposed to
it....

     Most interesting, and very encouraging to hear, thanks
for passing that along.   As an atheist, I'm always caught
betwixt and between when I hear about this kind  of reaction;
as a writer, I'm pleased.  So the two of us are going to go
 out behind  the house and slug it out.  Film at 11.

         jms

Subj:  Questions              Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  The Jawa / Jawa        December 19, 1995 11:05:19 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418808

      {regarding suggestions for Jawa's novel}

       Technical: if someone who knows scientific stuff said
"this character can't do  this because it's technically
impossible," I'd have to really consider it, if he could  give
me a good enough argument.  (And even there you have wiggle
room...what  we *think* is impossible now may not be in 200
years.  Serious scientists years  ago said that if you went
more than 60 miles an hour in a train or a car you'd be 
killed by the pressure.  So as long as you can make a plaus-
ible argument that  it's *possible,* even if it's highly
unlikely, you can sometimes get away with  rubber science.) 
If it's a big glaring issue, or in the present where you don't
have  alternate options, you may be stuck hewing to it.  If
the person suggested an  alternative, and that alternative
worked, and kept the science valid, sure, I'd take  it. That's
what a consultant is for.  As long as it doesn't compromise
the integrity  of the story.

       Who reads: Yes, do be careful in your selection.  Some
people will tell you  how to write it "better," when they
really mean "write it more like *I* would've  written it."  A
really bad reaction to what you've written, from someone you
like or  admire, can be an absolute soul-killer.  And they may
not be right.  May, in fact, be  quite wrong.  What you also
have to remember is what every writer learns: if you  put your
work out there, and you ASK for an opinion, suddenly they feel
that they  *must have* an opinion, and they *must find*
flaws...so instantly that tends to  skew things toward more
negative comments than might be the case if they just  picked
the book up off a store shelf and read it.  If you can find an
adult *writer* to  look at it, you may consider that...but to
go to non-writers for technical advice or  reactions or
suggestions on writing is often non-constructive.  Their
reaction to  the material may be valid, but they may not have
the language or know the writing  craft well enough to steer
you in the right direction, and may only succeed in  muddying
up the waters.  If I were working to be a draftsman, and 
finished my  first big design, I'd probably show it to another
draftsman before I showed it to my  Aunt Morgana la Fey.

       Whoever you turn to for advice, always remember that
that advice must  always be secondary to what the small, still
voice of the writer inside you insists  is correct.  You have
to find your own voice, and if that means not taking the other
person's suggestions, then that's what you have to do. Either
you'll be right, or  you'll be wrong, and you'll hear the same
comment from dozens of others, or  those in the field, and
then you may have to reconsider your position.  But initially, 
follow your voice.

       Magazine sales: no, your story can definitely be
published elsewhere  UNLESS the magazine specifically indi-
cates that it buys "all rights." Otherwise, it  will usually
buy other rights.  First North American rights are the most
common,  leaving you free to sell it to other magazines
overseas, and to other magazines in  the US after a reasonable
period has passed, or if it's to a non-competing  magazine. 
It's pretty much unheard of these days for magazines to buy
all rights.   (Suggestion: go to your local library and pick
up a copy of WRITER'S MARKET,  published yearly by Writer's
Digest Books.  They generally explain the various  rights you
sell in such situations.)

         jms

Subj:  DS9                    Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Elizabeth        Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:14:07 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418814

     Actually, the limited edition of Harlan's "City on the
Edge of Forever" script -- in  its various versions, outlines,
with postscripts by Nimoy, Koenig, Kelley, Takai and others -
is already out, and has totally sold out.  There will probably
be a  trade paperback version sometime next year.

       jms

Subj:  Official Fanclub       Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Matthias Neumann Tuesday, December 19, 1995 11:14:08 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418815

      We hope to annouce the B5 fan club within the next week.

         jms

Subj:  Official Fanclub       Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Anne L. Warner         December 20, 1995 6:28:21 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419336

     Yes, one thing we've been discussing with the friendly
folks at WB is licensing  the videos via the fan club as
limited editions.  I don't know how limited "limited"  is yet,
it kinda depends on our resources.  It may just be a few
thousand each as  we gear up.  (And while we've been told we
*can* make the deal, we haven't yet  geared up the paperwork,
as we've been waiting for the fan club paperwork to  come in
first.)  I'll certainly recommend 2 eps per tape when we do
it; any more  than that, and you go to 160 minute tape, which
is thinner, and breaks and  stretches more easily than 120
tapes.

     (We won't be able to do widescreen until WB authorizes
the re-telecineing of  the original negative film stock back
to its initial aspect ratio, and releases the  funds to do
that, which are considerable.)

         jms




  SSSSS   PPPPP  OOOOO   IIIII   L        EEEEE   RRRRR
  S       P   P  O   O     I     L        E       R   R
  SSSSS   PPPPP  O   O     I     L        EEE     RRRRR
      S   P      O   O     I     L        E       R  R
  SSSSS   P      OOOOO   IIIII   LLLLL    EEEEE   R   R






  SSSSS   PPPPP  OOOOO   IIIII   L        EEEEE   RRRRR
  S       P   P  O   O     I     L        E       R   R
  SSSSS   PPPPP  O   O     I     L        EEE     RRRRR
      S   P      O   O     I     L        E       R  R
  SSSSS   P      OOOOO   IIIII   LLLLL    EEEEE   R   R





Subj:  Looking Back and Forward  Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  John M. Kahane   Thursday, December 21, 1995 4:07:17 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419590

     Regarding "Legacies," there's one brief blip in there
that we're going to see  again; I'm not sure I'd call it a
clue, but certainly a cue...a hint of something to  come.  You
won't have to wonder what it is; it'll be shown in a flashback
in that  particular yet-to-air episode.

     What does the learning curve tell me these days?  That
I've got a LOT of  learning ahead of me yet.

     Re: season 3 scripts...I'm quite happy with them, and the
finished episodes.   I'd put on the top of the list for this
season (not necessarily in order) Messsages  From Earth, Point
Of No Return, Severed Dreams, Voices of Authority, Passing 
Through Gethsemane, A Late Delivery From Avalon, Dust To Dust,
and Convictions; they're real favorites of mine.  I suspect
that Ship of Tears and  Interludes & Examinations will also
come out *very* well.

        jms

Subj:  JMS resigns rastb5     Section: Babylon 5: General
  To:  Anne L. Warner   Monday, December 18, 1995 11:25:09 PM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #418141

      <Quoting Anne L. Warner to JMS>:

      >Oh, dear!  Coming from you, such reassurance (that I'll
      >get my wish to learn  about Valen and the Grey Council
      >"and then some.") is very disturbing.  I'll wait 
      >eagerly.  Do I hold my breath? or is this months or
      >seasons in the future?


     Figure by the end of this season you'll know a lot more
about all this.

         jms

Subj:  <Notes for upcoming eps>  Section: Babylon 5: Upcoming
  To:  John Yuen        Thursday, December 21, 1995 3:32:30 AM
From:  J. Michael Straczynski       #419582

     Actually, only 1 in the mini-arc of 3 will remain after
the next batch; the final two,  as of now, in the January/Feb-
ruary period will be "Messages From Earth," the 1st  of the
three, then "Point of No Return."  Only "Severed Dreams" will
remain for the  following cluster.

         jms



More information about the B5JMS mailing list