JMS on CompuServe (Jan 12, 1998) *POSSIBLE SPOILERS*
bbarrett at speedlink.com
bbarrett at speedlink.com
Mon Jan 12 21:01:24 EST 1998
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WARNING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The following posts may contain SPOILERS for
upcoming Babylon 5 episodes.
Continue at your own risk.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL IS THE COPYRIGHT OF THE
RESPECTIVE MESSAGE AUTHORS AND CANNOT BE
REPRODUCED IN ANY FORM WITHOUT THE EXPRESSED
PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.
Note that JMS has expressed his public permission
that all of his messages may be reproduced freely.
I give permission for my summaries to be reposted in
any form, however I reserve all rights to them and
the right to revoke this permission at any time.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Archives of this material may be found at:
http://www.johndelenn.com/
**********************************************
[ Summary of subjects in this section: ]
Sb: #14602-Centauri... REPUBLIC??
Sb: #14608-<In The Beginning>
Sb: #14652-<In The Beginning>
#: 14602 S2/Bab 5: General
11-Jan-98 23:30:14
Sb: #14452-#Centauri... REPUBLIC??
Fm: GARDNER L. HARRIS
Joe, I have to think I missed something in seeing all the fires out Londo's
palace windows. By the time he came to power the Shadows had done their
damage and left. So are we looking at civil war, or a Narn invasion?
Maybe that's all to be explained in S5?
GardnerH
-Gardner L. Harris
#: 14607 S2/Bab 5: General
12-Jan-98 00:19:14
Sb: #14602-Centauri... REPUBLIC??
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
It's coming.
jms
[ Summary: Asks if the use of previously filmed clips in new works is
pretty standard in Hollywood. ]
#: 14657 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
12-Jan-98 11:37:08
Sb: #14608-<In The Beginning>
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
This is all standard stuff with the various guilds.
jms
#: 14652 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
12-Jan-98 10:46:00
Sb: #14583-#<In The Beginning>
Fm: CARL CANTARELLA
Joe,
I've been watching the season one episodes on TNT with interest, and one of
the things that has caught my attention is how well Michael O'Hare has been
coming off in the role of Sinclair, which is not as stiff as I remembered him.
What I find so striking about it though is that he couldn't have been more
blank, bland and stiff concerning his delivery in the role in WWE. I have come
to believe that he probably did this deliberately in that two parter, probably
because he didn't like the fate of the character and its implications to him
as an actor, and having seen his performance ability in the earlier episodes,
I know he was capable of more than what he delivered in the latter. Am I wrong
to ask you about this, or do you see it at all similarly? I realize that this
is an awkward question for you to answer, but it's been bugging me and I felt
I should ask you about it despite being reluctant.
#: 14658 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
12-Jan-98 11:37:09
Sb: #14652-<In The Beginning>
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
No, he spoke to me about his approach to the role in WWE, and he said
that he wanted to play it distant, that in a way, Sinclair had already gone
beyond, was more mystical and reserved. Hence the difference.
jms
[END]
-***
-*** B5JMS SUBSCRIBERS: Replies to messages go to the list maintainer,
-*** <b5jms-owner at cs.columbia.edu>. If you want to reply elsewhere, adjust
-*** the "To" field. See http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~ezk/b5jms/ for all
-*** other information about this list.
More information about the B5JMS
mailing list