B5's Plot holes

[B5JMS Poster]

Subject: B5's Plot holes
+  1: Nov  8, 1995: bmccrach at chardonnay.niagara.com (Brent B. McCrackin)
   2: Nov  8, 1995: fullert at ix.netcom.com (Theron Fuller )
   3: Nov  9, 1995: Robert Holland <rholland at triton.mayfield.hp.com>
   4: Nov  9, 1995: scottm at leapfrog.almac.co.uk (Malinda)
   5: Nov 10, 1995: kenyon at pogo.den.mmc.com (Warren Edward Kenyon)
+  6: Nov 11, 1995: Robert Holland <rholland at triton.mayfield.hp.com>
*  7: Nov 11, 1995: straczynski at genie.geis.com

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: bmccrach at chardonnay.niagara.com (Brent B. McCrackin)
Lines: 19


In article <47oejq$ihf at hprcl192.mayfield.hp.com> Robert Holland <rholland at triton.mayfield.hp.com> writes:
>
> That's my point. Some people like the Emperor's new clothes and turn a blind
> eye to the flaws in the fabric. The closer you look at the B5 weave, the more
> you detect its loose-knit nature. This thing is unravelling at the seams...

There is an important action that must be taken upon by the audience of Science
Fiction (whether reading or viewing).  It is known as 'Suspension of Disbelief'.
Most SF has so many plot holes and unbelievable portions in it that any analysis
will blow it apart.

Don't try to pick B5 to pieces, just enjoy it.  JMS is doing his best, and I feel
that most of us here can agree that its better than most.

--
		 Brent Bryan McCrackin
		St. Catharines, Ontario
	    bmccrach at chardonnay.niagara.com

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: Robert Holland <rholland at triton.mayfield.hp.com>
Lines: 73

kenyon at pogo.den.mmc.com (Warren Edward Kenyon) wrote:

>Not clear here.  
>
>Just hate a show (and its creator) because you BELIEVE it won't live up
>to full potential?   Pretty narrow thinking.


Your point, then, is that what we see is absolutely the best work
JMS can write and produce. Am I correct?

We can measure whether B5 lives up to its full potential fairly easily
by comparing what JMS said about his creation, and what we see on the
tube. 

Belief and hate have nothing to do with it.


>I really have to wonder, and I would like a concise answer, as to why 
>you and others who obviously hate the show continue to watch it.  

Your assumption is wrong. If we hated B5 we would not watch it.
But we do watch it and hope for better.

Better as in what is shown on tv is self-explanatory and requires
no retconning in this newsgroup, or by JMS.  

For instance, how do you feel about the new Bonanza-like quality
of the third season? I'm seeing a lot of people upset by the change.
Personally, I found ep 301 pretty entertaining. Good tv entertainment
values. Holes? Sure, but if you admit there are holes all the way back
to the pilot, you can enjoy the show for what it is.

If you refuse to admit holes, and we point them out to you, then
don't get too upset with us, friend. It's not our creation.

>And
>then tell us all how much you hate it.  

Those who hate the show watch Star Trek. You don't hear from them unless
you cross-post in their newsgroup.


>And then tell us all how much
>better you could do it.  

Haven't seen anyone claim to write B5 better. Have seen many claim other
writers have written similar themes in their works. B5 is JMS's story, so
we hold his feet to the fire.

One thing we can do is analyze the themes in B5 and the way in which JMS
presented them. Just about everyone here participates in this type of 
discussion. The flames erupt when one disagrees with another's analysis.


>And then never getting around to doing it.

Never get around to writing speculative scripts? That's frowned on here.
Never get around to writing B5 episodes? JMS is the sole writer in season
3, and if we wrote and produced our own it would be a copyright violation.

Your point is that because we do not write Babylon 5 we cannot critique it.

Concise answer? Bull.


>Sounds pretty elitist to me.

Well, what would you expect of elite media? :-) You know, it takes such
refinement to watch tv and post to newsgroups.

--RH


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

From: straczynski at genie.geis.com
Lines: 5

     When a movie or book is over, one can analyze the plot holes; right
now there are a few things that have to be paid off, but there aren't any
plot holes that I am aware of.

                                                          jms