ATTN: JMS: Pest Control on B5?
B5JMS Poster
b5jms-owner at shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu
Tue Apr 30 06:19:35 EDT 1996
Subject: ATTN: JMS: Pest Control on B5?
-----+-------------+--------------------------------------------------
No. | DATE | FROM
-----+-------------+--------------------------------------------------
+ 1: Apr 15, 1996: cboulis at mail1.sas.upenn.edu (Chrisso Boulis)
+ 28: Apr 20, 1996: lcrawfor at wittenberg.edu (Crawf)
* 29: Apr 20, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
+ 37: Apr 22, 1996: hawthorn at sover.net (Frank J. Perricone)
* 38: Apr 22, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
+ 46: Apr 23, 1996: capap at ACXRD.chem.tamu.edu (Rick Carroll)
* 47: Apr 23, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
+ 54: Apr 24, 1996: capap at ACXRD.chem.tamu.edu (Rick Carroll)
* 55: Apr 24, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
+ 63: Apr 26, 1996: Cindy Collins <ccollins at earthlink.net>
* 64: Apr 26, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
* 65: Apr 26, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
+ 81: Apr 29, 1996: RichardH at chancery.com (Richard Hough)
* 82: Apr 30, 1996: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: cboulis at mail1.sas.upenn.edu (Chrisso Boulis)
Lines: 11
Gharlone, I love your space (?) guerilla cricket. Is he related
to my urban guerilla squirrel, by any chance.
I have a feeling Garibaldi would deal with the cricket in much
the same manner that he finally dealer with Sparky the computer!
C.E.S. Boulis
UPMAA
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: lcrawfor at wittenberg.edu (Crawf)
Lines: 40
In article <4l12kd$7au at news.csus.edu>, gharlane at ccshp1.ccs.csus.edu (Gharlane of Eddore) writes:
[snip]
> Actually, the reasons for my original Mutant Crickets suggestion
> was that, in the first year of production, the B-5 set had a
> happy, healthy, LOUD cricket (crickets?) living there.....
> Understand, many Terran civilizations view the presence of a
> happy skreeking cricket as a GOOD omen, and are delighted by
> the chirps.... but when the crickets move into a sound set,
> things get strange.
Then I work in a very happy building. Furthermore, I am the sole
source of this happiness...I "lost" a couple hundred crickets out
of a shipment of 1000 and for much of January and February there
were crickets everywhere on the first floor. Mind, it *was* kinda
different to hear sounds of summer when the outside temperatures
were in the 20s...I have gotten better at both preventing escapes
and catching escapees since.
[snip]
> But JMS had the cricket gassed, or it died the Real Death
> on its own (stories vary; the only point of congruence is that
> Chirpy The Wonder Cricket is now definitely an EX-cricket)......
> and has gone ahead with a different species of B-5 vermin,
> one of which makes an appearance in "SIC TRANSIT VIR," which
> is why I'm willing to bring up the B-5 Crickets again, now.....
The escapees will only hang on six weeks or so max, although
during that time it may seem much longer... :-)
I suddenly have this inexplicable urge to rub my legs together...
larry crawford
lcrawfor at wittenberg.edu
still putting the psycho in psychobiology
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 10
Probably the one person who's had to know the most of what's coming is
Peter Jurasik, because we've had to flash forward to his future the most
of anyone, and he kinda needed to know what it meant and how he got there
in order to play it properly. After that...probably Mira, then Sheridan.
The rest are on a need to know basis.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: hawthorn at sover.net (Frank J. Perricone)
Lines: 17
On 20 Apr 1996 04:41:49 -0400, jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5) wrote:
>Probably the one person who's had to know the most of what's coming is
>Peter Jurasik, because we've had to flash forward to his future the most
>of anyone, and he kinda needed to know what it meant and how he got there
>in order to play it properly. After that...probably Mira, then Sheridan.
>The rest are on a need to know basis.
I wonder why he lists Peter and Mira by their names, but then says
Sheridan instead of Boxleitner. Surely SOMEONE here can weave an
intricate plot of foreshadowing or conspiracy around this? :)
* Frank J. Perricone * hawthorn at sover.net * Finger for my PGP public key *
Just because we're not all the same doesn't mean we have nothing in common
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
We apologize for the wanton use of the phrase "Fuck the CDA!" in this sig.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 10
Thanks. And yes, I'll be the first in American TV to do so; when you get
into the UK, however, you've got Terry Nation, who wrote all 16 (18?) of
Blake 7's first season, which represents some pretty nifty writing on his
part.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: capap at ACXRD.chem.tamu.edu (Rick Carroll)
Lines: 12
In Points of Departure, when Lennier tells Sheriden and Ivanova about the
reasons the Minbari surrendered, we get to see a flashback of the events
inside the Grey Council ship. Did Lennier mention Delenn's presence or
were the Council members left anonymous? I ask because when Lennier
arrived Delenn told him she wanted her Council connection to remain secret
to avoid certain questions.
Rick
Rick Carroll | I wish there were a knob on the TV which
Clearfield X-Ray Diffraction Lab | would turn up the intelligence. There's
Department of Chemistry | a knob marked brightness but it doesn't
Texas A&M University | work.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 9
Yes, the Torque- part of her name came from Torquemada, that's correct.
Just seemed appropriate since we were shortly doing an episode with an
inquisitor.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: capap at ACXRD.chem.tamu.edu (Rick Carroll)
Lines: 11
Waaaaaaaaaaaay back in the first season (okay, so that's not so way back)
someone asked you if the Babylon Project was a dream given form, whose
dream was it. At the time you said it was a good question and you would
answer it in an episode. Has that idea been tabled now or could it still be
worked in?
Rick
Rick Carroll | I wish there were a knob on the TV which
Clearfield X-Ray Diffraction Lab | would turn up the intelligence. There's
Department of Chemistry | a knob marked brightness but it doesn't
Texas A&M University | work.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 71
"First, I've heard the actor who played General Hague was supposed to
continue with the show but ended up going someplace else."
That's correct. He bailed at the last minute, even though we had first
dibs on him. Not much point to forcing an actor to stay if he wants to
go; you just get an unhappy set and a less than stellar performance. That
situation led to changing a grand total of 3 lines. Anything in Hague's
situation is what's called a "moveable piece," meaning it can be easily
assigned to others.
"Second, I've heard the actress that plays Delenn was supposed to remain
fully Membari but didn't like the heavy make-up"
Nope. That was never the intent. She was *always* going to make this
change.
and is now part-human.
"Third, the Sinclair thing. We all wonder if he's supposed to be back or
what (probably, "or what")--especially based on the "Babylon Squared" show
where Sinclair is the apparent leader of the Good Guys (tm)."
Watch the two-parter. We'll talk afterward.
"I heard Bruce Box...(uh, I'm too stupid to spell his name correctly)
isn't happy with the ratings, etc."
Point being...? Bruce is happy with the show, and staying with it; like
the rest of us, he wishes the show got more attention here in the US on a
par with what it gets overseas, particularly in the UK.
"I'm wondering...how do you deal with these things and keep the necessary
consistency? Are you just "rolling with the punches" and letting the
changes take place but keeping the main story idea intact? That's my
guess. Perhaps no one actor or person is essential to the story?"
As a writer, doing a long-term story, it'd be dangerous and short-sighted
for me to construct the story without trap doors for every single
character. Because Stuff Happens. An actor can get hit by a meteor, walk
off, whatever. So I deliberately and very carefully constructed this
puppy to be more or less airtight no matter what happens. You want to
drive from LA to San Diego. You figure on taking the 5 freeway all the
way down. Only when you get to the Slausen Cutoff (insert joke here),
there's a traffic jam...so you get off, take some alternate streets, and
come back again right back on track. Same thing here.
That was one of the big risks going into a long-term storyline which I
considered long in advance; you can't predict real-world events, so you
have to compensate for them and plan for them in advance. Otherwise you
could paint yourself into a corner.
Similarly, there are story changes that come up at me by surprise, which
make total sense, which result in actor changes. As a writer, you have to
be flexible enough to recognize a stronger, better path when it presents
itself; to be so rigidly locked into your prior structure eliminates
spontaneity and the chance to explore new routes. This is exactly the
same thing that happens when you write a novel; you learn things 1/2 way
through writing a novel you can learn no other way.
I've been writing and selling since I was 17. In all that time, I've
never once followed an outline beat-for-beat once I got into the main
writing, whatever the final venue. No outline survives contact with the
enemy. It's a *guideline* that keeps you on track when you waver, and
serves as base camp, providing security when it strikes you to go off and
explore a path you hadn't noticed before.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Cindy Collins <ccollins at earthlink.net>
Lines: 16
Jms at B5 wrote
(in response to whether or not the books should be considered "canon"):
>
> My theory is that *in general* the novels and comics tend to be canon,
> but the details may not always be, mainly because it's virtually > impossible to ride herd on every single line of all this the way I do >
the show. It physically can't be done. But where possible, we keep >
it as close to cointinuity as possible.
>
> jms
Thank you for the response. I certainly understand the physical
impossibility of maintaining _absolute_ continuity, but it's good to
know that I should regard the printed stories as canon, more or less.
--Cindy Ruth Collins
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 10
My theory is that *in general* the novels and comics tend to be canon, but
the details may not always be, mainly because it's virtually impossible to
ride herd on every single line of all this the way I do the show. It
physically can't be done. But where possible, we keep it as close to
cointinuity as possible.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 9
Cindy: absolutely, pass along anything here you think may be of any value.
There's a lot of misinformation and bad mythology about how writing works,
and how TeeVee works...anything that helps to clarify those areas is
nothing less than terrific.
jms
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: RichardH at chancery.com (Richard Hough)
Lines: 388
Warning! Spoilers for "Severed Dreams" follow:
In Message-ID: <4l0h69$17i at panther.safari.net>,
FemEng at safari.net (Andrea Beth Novin) writes:
> The following is an opinion of the tactics used during the
> recent B-5 episode, "Severed Dreams." While the following post is
> not meant to criticize JMS or his production staff, there are
> comments and questions raised during the episode that I feel need
> to be addressed.
[SNIP]
I don't know about "need", but it's certainly fun to analyze the show;
exploring ideas and even nitpicking is fun and easy on B-5 because there's
so much going on. It's one of the things I like about the program. Lets
take a look at a few of your comments, which I have edited slightly.
> Comment 1. Range
>
> Why is it that space ships close to rock throwing range to use
> their weapons? It would seem with the technical advances and the
> vacuum of space, lasers should be capable of causing extensive
> damage over ranges of a hundred to a thousand kilometers.
Well, since the weapon beams glow in the vacuum of space, and there
was no indication of reflections from the ships (even a black surface
reflects some light, and the EA ships ain't black) it would seem
unlikely the weapons were lasers. My guess is that the beams were
some kind of coherent plasma or particle beam. Both of which could
emit light in transit and cause all kinds of secondary damage even
on an armored target.
Since an experienced major's first command was to move to close
range, obviously there is some advantage in doing this. We had
previously seen ships at long range missing each other a lot,
presumably due to ECM. Also, there are defenses like ablative
particles or electrostatic fields that could attenuate plasma or
particle beams over a large distance. Point defence weaponry or
an induced change on the attacking beam could make a hostile
long range weapon miss entirely. Under these constraints you may
very well try to get as close as possible, especially if you had more
powerful weapons and/or were already ready to open fire.
> Also, I cannot believe that any
> captain worth their salt would be stupid enough to close within
> ramming distance of a crippled ship.
As you mentioned, the ships were already at point-blank range
before the CH was crippled.
> Also why did the Roanoke
> (RO), get that close to B-5 to attack? It seems it was capable of
> causing enough damage at a distance to reduce B-5's defenses to a
> point that the boarding party could have been launched. History
> indicates that boarding party actions launched against a prepared
> opponent will fail unless the opponent has been worn down first.
> B-5 does not appear to have any really long range weapons in
> their defense grid. The Roanoke Captain chose to close to point
> blank range, and as a result got wasted.
See earlier paragraph as to why the RO would close range. No doubt
it could have destroyed B-5 at long range if it were allowed to, but
remember there were two other warships and several squadrons of
fighters restricting its options somewhat. The RO captain was quite
clear that his goal was not to destroy B-5, but to capture it. This
makes launching a boarding party necessary, whether B-5 was
"worn down" or not. Since the goal was to take the station intact,
wearing down the defense grid would not have affected the outcome
of the boarding action. True, doing so would have made it safer to
launch the boarding craft at long range, but they would still have to
survive the fighter screen, and it may have been imperative to get
the station out of the battle or to turn the defense grid against the
AL and CH.
> There was a tactic in
> 18th and early 19th century naval warfare that said you go in
> close between two ships to fire broadside into each. This damages
> both ships at the same time, and makes it hard for the enemy to
> return fire without hitting each other. This tactic could be used
> in space, but I saw no broadside batteries in any ship present.
Since space ships, unlike ocean-going ships, are not constrained to
motion in a plane, the chance of an attacker being able to move
EXACTLY between two opponents is rather slight. Also, assuming
the weapons require some kind of particle accelerator or launch
track, the EA ships aren't wide enough to mount a very powerful
broadside battery. Interesting idea, though.
> Comment 2. Communications
>
> I guess President Clarke never heard of secure communications. He
> sends out his ships and uses codes he has to know the rebels
> have, thus giving away the element of surprise. Does this make
> any sense to anyone?
I admit this is problematic. There seems to be no narrowcast FTL
communications in the B-5 universe, aside from couriers. Perhaps
rebel sympathisers leaked the info? Perhaps the transmission was
intended to be overheard as a threat ("Attention all ships, if the
AL and CH do not surrender immediately you are authorized to
use whatever force necessary ...")? Can someone come up with
something plausible which is supported by events on the show?
>
> Comment 3. Maneuver
>
> So now B-5, AL and CH know the bad guys are coming. What happens
> when they show up? Both the AL and CH are dead in space, not
> moving a millimeter. This throws away any tactical advantage
> their foreknowledge gave them. I do not know why they were dead
> still, a moving target has to be harder to hit than a stationary
> one.
Since the defending tactic required close range, any initial velocity
would first have to be reversed. This means being "dead in
space" WAS their tactical advantage. Also, the primary EA weapons
seemed to fire only along the axis of the ship. If this is the case,
time spent maneuvering would be subtracted from time to aim, so a
stationary ship would be most accurate.
While a moving "target" may be harder to hit, a moving spaceship
may be easier. EA ships are not able to perform any fancy acrobatics
or multi-G turns, so their chance of dodging a beam weapon is nil.
A moving ship would also expel reaction mass and probably have
a more pronounced energy signature, making it easier to target. A
moving ship would also move away from any defensive ordinance
like ablative particles, ECM decoys, or a fighter screen.
> A simple tactic would have been to maneuver slightly below
> and to either side of the jump gate. As the RO, AG and other
> ships show up, they can be hit from behind immediately, or at
> least be forced to split their fire. They would also be in a
> position where the main batteries of both the AL and CH could be
> used. Being lower that the jump gate, their fire would have no
> possibility of hitting B-5. In that position both the AL and CH
> can perform a classic Hammer and Anvil attack using B-5 as the
> Anvil. This would put the attacking force in a very difficult
> position.
This does sound good. Obviously, the trained commanders decided
a close-range attack was better. Perhaps JMS could use your
suggestion in a different tactical situation?
> Comment 4: Operational Plans
>
> Did anyone hear of an operational or battle plan by either
> Sheridan, or the Captains of the Al and CH, other than launching
> fighters? Can someone explain to me the battle plan of the
> attacking force?
Unfortunately, no. While I would love to see things like operational
plans, troop deployment, and detailed ship tactics in the show, I
understand the constraints of a television drama in glossing over
such "uninteresting" details in favor of firefights and starfuries
launching. The same thing happens in WWII movies. Don't mistake
the lack of emphasis on such strategic-level details for an
absence of such details.
> The attacking force was so small as to have had
> to struggle just to take care of the AL and CH without B-5's
> assets thrown in. Just who in Earthdome planned this operation?
[SNIP]
> Also, why did the first
> attacking force not wait for the second force that was only a few
> minutes behind them. Concentration of forces has been a military
> maxim since the time of Alexander. With all forces present, they
> could have made short work of B-5, CH and AL.
Yes, the initial force was too small to take on B-5 and the rebel
ships together. Yes it would have been better for them to combine
with the second force. Why do you assume the mission of the first
force was to "take care of the AL and CH"? Why do you assume the
two attacking could be combined, had the same mission, or were
even aware of each other? Remember in the teaser the AL and CH
were already being attacked before deciding to escape to B-5. ISN
reported the crackdown on rebels before the AL and CH arrived.
When the AG and RO arrived they demanded the surrender of B-5
and came equipped to storm the station. They did not seem equipped
to also take on two rebel warships. Which is entirely plausible
since nobody could have known the AL and CH would be there!
If anything, Earthdome was able to react to the situation
surprisingly fast, since long-distance travel seems to require
hours or days. Why do you think the second force was "only a few
minutes behind them"? The battle could have been going on for hours
in 'B-5 time', which was compressed to a few minutes for the show.
There is no evidence the second force even knew about the first one.
More likely, the original force was dispatched to secure control over
B-5 and, when it was surprised by the rebel warships, sent out a
call for reinforcements. A second battle fleet, probably the one
originally hunting the AL and CH, was close enough to respond
immediately. But they didn't arrive in time, fortunately for our heroes.
> The only thing that
> Earthdome could not have foreseen is the intervention of the
> Minbari.
Agreed. Their timely appearance was very dramatic yet plausible.
Well done, JMS.
>
> Comment 5. Damage Control
>
> Is there damage control on EA ships? The battles between ships I
> have seen on B-5 can be reduced to this statement: "Tag, you're
> dead." If EA ships can be taken out that easily, they would not
> be built the way they are.
We have already seen damage control on B-5 after their encounter
with the Centauri warship. I assume it is one of those "undramatic"
details left out of the actual battle scenes.
It is not at all accurate to describe the battles as "Tag, you're dead".
Many ships have been shown functioning after taking damage; in
Severed Dreams alone the AL was still able to fight effectively
after being damaged earlier, which is evidence they must have some
damage control, and the CH was able to maneuver enough to ram
even after sustaining massive damage.
As for "not be built the way they are", even a block of solid armor
would not be able to withstand nuclear-level assaults, as well as
being very difficult to maneuver. The best way to avoid damage is
by not getting hit. The battle tactics and evidence of defensive
technology shown in the program seem to agree with that philosophy.
> Also, why do all damaged ships seem to
> explode? What is exploding? The fuel which I assume is hydrogen?
> It will burn in contact with air, but the burning usually is very
> brief. I doubt if it's the fusion reactor blowing. Everything I
> have read about proposed fusion reactor designs indicate they
> cool quickly once the containment field is gone.
Frankly, this bothers me too. Since you need a greater mass of
oxygen than hydrogen for a chemical reaction, there isn't enough
air in the ships to sustain a hydrogen explosion that large.
At first I thought the explosions were caused by the attacking
beam superheating the ships volatile chemical components (air,
plastics, crewmembers, ...), but the ships have a puzzling
tendency to explode several seconds AFTER being hit. Perhaps
the power or weapon systems use some kind of reactive
chemicals? The Narn ships didn't seem to go up in a fireball
when hit by the Shadow beam weapon. Maybe EA ships carry
a cargo of explosives? (<- this is a joke!). Can any other loyal
fans come up with some reason for this phenomenon?
> Also, why can't
> we control the fires in space. There seems to be a simple means
> to do this, open the door.
Since the "fires" are visible on the outside of the ships, I would
assume they are actually secondary explosions or parts of the
structure heated to incandescence by the attacking weapons.
Opening the doors to space would seem a very inefficient way
of controlling fires; it is only feasible near the outer hull of the
ship, all lost air would have to be replaced, and doing this would
have rather drastic consequences on the crew. Better, in my
opinion, is to seal burning areas off and let the fire burn itself
out.
> I find it hard to believe that in
> combat situations, the crew are not in some protective suits that
> offer protection against decompression. By depressuring the ships
> before combat, you also eliminate the fire and explosive
> decompression problems.
While bulkheads and pressure-tight doors would prevent fire and
decompression spreading through ships, I agree that vulnerable
areas should be depressurized and critical personnel should be
protected. This would certainly include C&C and command staff.
It is interesting to note the starfury pilots do seem to be in some
kind of suit; perhaps the inside of the cabins are not pressurized.
> Comment 6. Boarding Parties
>
> I am sorry, but the Narn are the stupidest fighters I have ever
> seen in my life. No wonder they lost the war. The enemy is
> breaking in. He has to go through you to get in the clear. You
> immediately charge and engage them on their own ground.
[SNIP]
> No,
> what I saw in that battle would be similar to the Germans on D-
> Day running out of their bunkers to engage the allied troops on
> the beach in hand to hand combat. Looks great, but you lose big
> time.
Really? More stupid than the French in Cyprus, who fled at the first
enemy advance, leaving their equipment and bases to be captured?
More stupid than the German Ost brigades in WWII, who had to be
guarded by their own side to prevent desertion? Or would you see
these as 'clever' fighters, because they saved their own hides?
Nor is your analogy of Germans leaving their bunkers accurate.
The boarding party had already broken into the station, which is
hardly "their own ground", and the Narn engaged them with ranged
weapons. Perhaps Garibali's choice of a defensive line was better,
or perhaps the Narn felt the boarding party had to be engaged before
they could infiltrate the station. I agree the Narn are too hot-headed
and refuse to take orders from aliens, but calling them "stupid" is
insulting and not supported by the evidence.
> Also, there was only one boarding party launched. Even if
> they would have been allowed to walk in, I doubt if there was
> enough force there to take over the station. Boading parties work
> best when there are many of them which forces the defender to
> split his attention and forces.
Why do you think only one boarding party was launched? True,
Ivanova said "a" boarding craft (or whatever) landed, but this
could have been the first one to land or the only one through the
defense grid. The entire boarding force could very well have
been large enough to seize control of the station, we only saw a
small part of the entire boarding action. When you watch a WWII
movie do you think the firefight the stars are in is the only battle
going on? I assume the show concentrated on the encounter Garibaldi
was in and that the entire battle went similarly.
> Final Comments
>
> Like I said, I am not trolling for FLAME WARS here, but there
> seems to be little tactical battle planning here. I know, you can
> say there are constraints being place upon the producer for doing
> this way: technical, time and cost constraints come to mind. A
> second reason may be that the show loses dramatic effect doing it
> more realistically. Sorry, I don't buy any of these.
Neither would I. Yes, time and cost constrains the show into
compressing the entire battle into a few minutes featuring only
the major characters, but I don't agree that these contraints
somehow make the show more unrealistic. What is unrealistic
is to expect every detail of such a major battle to be covered
exhaustively in about a half-hour with a television budget.
That is, as long as you don't expect battles to be won by the
major characters "modulating the phase frequency"
or something.
> JMS has gone
> to extremes, well beyond anyone else in this media to present a
> factual, realistic and believable program. I simply can't believe
> in blowing off the battle scenes. There has to be reason for what
> I see, and I am asking for answers by JMS or anyone else who can
> give me a reasonable explanation. I am open for any and all
> comments.
I hope you mean that sincerely. Severed Dreams included, in my
opinion, one of the best space battles I have ever seen in TV or movie
SF. Was it perfect? No. I mentioned several things that didn't make
sense to me. But I accept that we are only looking at a small part
of the entire B-5 universe, and there are aspects of it I don't know
about. When I spot something that doesn't make sense I try to
figure it out in the context of the show, not deciding beforehand
what 'should' happen and then complaining when the show doesn't
follow my preconceptions.
I too am interested in any reasonable explanations anyone can give.
"Blowing off the battle scenes" is, in my opinion, not a reasonable
explanation.
Richard Hough
--
#include <stddisclaimer>
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: jmsatb5 at aol.com (Jms at B5)
Lines: 11
Well, they're interesting speculations, and obviously I can't say one
thing or another about them at this time.
But on another level, you're right; if the clues are properly placed, and
the story proceeds in a logical, consistent fashion, about 20% of the
people will guess correctly on where it's going (this from my years on
Murder, She Wrote).
jms
-***
-*** B5JMS SUBSCRIBERS: Messages to this list come from various sources.
-*** Replies to them, automatically to go the maintainer of this list
-*** <b5jms-owner at majordomo.cs.columbia.edu>. If you want to reply to
-*** someone else, make sure the "To:" header line is correctly set.
More information about the B5JMS
mailing list