JMS on CompuServe (Jan 26, 1998) *POSSIBLE SPOILERS* (1/3)
bbarrett at speedlink.com
bbarrett at speedlink.com
Mon Jan 26 15:24:35 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: #16242-Season 5 Intro
Sb: #16144-#Season 5 Intro
Sb: #16231-Season 5 Intro
Sb: #16141-#Season 5 - Final 10?
Sb: #16236-No Compromises
Sb: #16200-Compromise or No
Sb: #16212-TNT Won't Show All...?
Sb: #16300-Formulaic Television
Sb: #16321-#Formulaic Television
#: 16242 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 06:26:13
Sb: #16069-#Season 5 Intro
Fm: SCOTT J. EPSTEIN
Joe,
The thought just ocurred to me that the reaction isn't so much to the spoiler
aspect as to the specificity aspect of the Clark line. All the other lines are
much more vague, and general enough that they can be removed from context. The
Clark line is very specific, and IMHO, what people are reacting to is that
that contrasts with the generality of everything else. I.e., if the line was,
"We are here to place the President under arrest," without naming Clark, I
don't think people would react to it at all.
BTW, I loved that Lorien's question, "Do you have anything worth living for?"
was voiced over the shot of the hypodermic-in-the-chest.
SJE
#: 16294 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 12:41:13
Sb: #16242-Season 5 Intro
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
If they don't want any reference to what happened in S4, why are they
watching S5? That line is no more specific than any other discussion about
the fall of Clark in S5 episodes.
This is a silly conversation.
jms
#: 16144 S2/Bab 5: General
22-Jan-98 18:41:04
Sb: #16119-Season 5 Intro
Fm: CARL CANTARELLA
<Spoiler space >
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
>>Okay, maybe that one's a bit iffy, but when you watch the actual episode the
war against Clarke was referenced several times, anyway. I really don't think
you can shield people from learning what happened before.<<
Well, that's Joe's point also, and of course I'm aware of it, which is
why I've suggested to newbies to steer clear of season 5 at least for the time
being if they really don't like Spoilers. I've told them to tape the episodes
in the meantime and to put the tape aside, though granted, that's not so easy,
but it really is an awkward predicament to be in if you happen to be a new
viewer and just don't like Spoilers.
#: 16216 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 02:06:10
Sb: #16144-#Season 5 Intro
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Thing is, I think we're taking the term "spoilers" and taking it to a
new level of definition that simply isn't valid. A spoiler means getting
information on an episode that hasn't aired yet in one's area, it doesn't
refer to things that a) have happened long ago, or b) one may not have seen
the first time it aired. I just don't think it's a valid approach on the face
of it.
jms
[ Summary: "It looks as if you are going to have a lot to say this
season." ]
#: 16293 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 12:41:13
Sb: #16231-Season 5 Intro
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Thanks...each season's intro ep is a bit easier going, designed to bring
newbies into the show by introducing the characters and universe and
backstory...the next one is pretty darned intense.
jms
#: 16141 S2/Bab 5: General
22-Jan-98 18:25:02
Sb: #Season 5 - Final 10?
Fm: JOSEPH DEMARTINO
The Lurker's Guide is quoting a cable industry trade mag report that TNT plans
to hold back the final 10 episodes of Season 5 until the Fall. Any truth to
this report? Also noticed that their episode list now numbers "SiL" as 523.
Not long ago you posted a note or reply here about having just finished the
script for 519, and realizing that you only had "three more to go" until you
were finished writing B5. Didn't know if you were referring to the third TNT
movie, or if late night work had scrambled your math circuits since finishing
519 should only have left *two* more shows to write, 522 already having been
written and shot. Am I reading too much into this, or are we going to get a
"bonus episode" somewhere along the line in S5? BTW, loved "NC". G'Kar's
little editing job had me laughing all the way through the next commercial
break.
Joe
#: 16217 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 02:06:10
Sb: #16141-#Season 5 - Final 10?
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
No, this season you get 22 episodes, no extras in the series.
Re: the schedule...it was brought to our attention that the NBA coverage
would lead to episodes being shunted around and pre-empted for a number of
weeks. Obviously this concerned us, and would concern viewers, so we
discussed it with TNT, and they came back to us with the notion that we would
continue new episodes until hitting #100, break for the NBA games, then come
back (starting with another possible half-hour special) afterward at the same
time to finish the season.
It was either this, or get shuffled around the schedule due to the NBA,
and the former is infinitely preferable.
jms
[ Summary: "You've always shown too much respect for your female
characters to let [Tracy Scoggins] be eye candy." ]
#: 16295 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
23-Jan-98 12:41:14
Sb: #16236-No Compromises
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Thanks...she's a good character and a fine performer.
jms
#: 16200 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
22-Jan-98 21:12:12
Sb: Compromise or No
Fm: REBECCA ESCHLIMAN
"No Compromises" as a title seems to be an inherent warning to the characters
for episodes yet to come -- compromise may be what's required in the
authority-dance of Lochley and Sheridan, Lochley and Garibaldi, Garibaldi and
Zach.
I was highly satisfied by Lochley as a character and Tracy Scoggins'
portrayal. Her introduction as someone who thinks she knows it all signals
mud-puddles in her path to come, perhaps the clearest suggestion that an
uncompromising position is dangerous. But you managed to throw in suggestions
of other dimensions to Lochley -- her uncertainty in her first on-station
meeting with Sheridan, her lack of paranoia in responding to Byron's initial
"mute-button" communique (her later backup of security forces, to me, was
cautionary, not paranoid <g>), her delight at Special Simon's greeting. <Odd
thought -- interesting parallel between Byron's muting the environment for
Lochley and Simon's actual muteness> She is a character which much intrigues
me and makes me eager to know more about her history.
I found Garibaldi's minister-without-portfolio (albeit later given a
clandestine portfolio) mother-hennishness touching. He was back to his
original hot-dogging self, but with the additional impetus of expiating his
Bester-generated sins.
What I find most intriguing about the telepath colony-to-be is that you've
presented them as as sort of Mennonite bunch. The anti-violence,
anti-technology, soberly-dressed definition tends to make us sympathize with
them, but makes me wonder if this isn't an uncompromising status that will
lead to trouble.
Although Sheridan isn't compromising on having his inauguration go through as
planned (although G'Kar's "abridgement" has to be seen as a compromise of
sorts), and Delenn isn't willing to compromise his safety by having it go
ahead as scheduled, they do seem to have achieved a temporary compromise of
living arrangements. But the alignment of Sheridan and Lochley opposing
Delenn's caution sets off an alarm-bell.
I suppose that the assassin-elect saw the end of Clarke's government as a
compromise not to be borne. But you've driven me nuts with the music box --
character quirk or portent of something?
On a second viewing (but only on second viewing), G'Kar's comment about "words
and I locked in mortal combat" made me think that this is also authorial
commentary (since S5's almost written you must be at least at a draw, a la
TKO), as is possibly "geometries that circumscribe your waking life"
(certainly an apt description of the constellations of details with which your
producer-avatar must deal).
In "No Compromises" I enjoyed the feel of pieces being positioned on the
board, ready for the next dice-throw (but I did miss Lennier, Vir and Lyta).
B5's current position as independent, soon to be bought by the Alliance, but
under the authority of an Earthforce officer, is wonderfully ambiguous and
ripe for rich storytelling.
-rje-
The best thing we can do is to make wherever we're lost in look as much like
home as we can. -- Christopher Fry
#: 16218 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
23-Jan-98 02:13:14
Sb: #16200-Compromise or No
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Thanks...it's a good stew. I've got the ingredients in place now, all
that remains is to start stirring the pot.
jms
#: 16212 (C) S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
23-Jan-98 00:51:29
Sb: TNT Won't Show All...?
Fm: BRENT BARRETT
Joe,
Cable World is running a report on TNT's use of B5, and in the report,
the following lines rather disturbed me:
"As of late last week, TNT hadn't determined when the fifth season would end.
The 100th episode will air April 8, when the series will go on hiatus in
deference to TNT's NBA playoff coverage.
'There will be 10 episodes left,' Safon says. 'We'll probably run them into
the fall. We're going to make a big deal about the 100th episode and will
obviously ramp up to the finale. We want to make sure we provide the proper
support.'"
What worries me is this: You said earlier that TNT wanted to run the
series straight-through, yet Safon (a TNT employee), contradicts that in this
statement. And the other thing that bothers me a bit is that TNT has
apparently planned, all along, to disrupt B5's schedule for NBA coverage.
I know that you can't control TNT, and you obviously don't know
everything they plan or can predict everything they do, but I just wanted to
let you know that I think this stinks. :-(
I'm very thankful to TNT for giving us a fifth season of your show, but
I've been getting increasingly less and less pleased with the way in which
they're treating the show itself. Sure, they push it like crazy, but they
tend to start it slightly off the top of the hour, run inane little tie-in
clips that insult the show (transporters for the Rough Cut crew? Come on!),
and now it looks like they'll treat its schedule with as little respect as a
number of the old syndicated stations.
*sigh*
Sorry to gripe at you. I know this isn't really an issue for you, but I
just had to vent somewhere...
-- Brent
#: 16219 S5/Seas. 5 SPOILERS
23-Jan-98 02:13:14
Sb: #16212-TNT Won't Show All...?
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
This came out of discussions with TNT when it came out that we would
have to be pre-empted and shuffled around for the NBA playoffs. It made more
sense to let them go through unobstructed, then come back afterward in the
same slot rather than forcing fans to go hunting again. It's not a big.
jms
[ Summary: Has it all been worth it? ]
#: 16535 S2/Bab 5: General
25-Jan-98 00:29:07
Sb: #16300-Formulaic Television
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Has it been worth it for me? Yeah, I think it has...it's been tough,
but worthwhile. What matters is if, in the long run, viewers will think it
was worth it. Me, I was gonna be here anyway, and the story was gonna tell
itself in my brain anyway, so I may as well have gone along with it....
jms
#: 16321 S2/Bab 5: General
23-Jan-98 16:13:08
Sb: #16168-#Formulaic Television
Fm: PHILIP HORNSEY
>> I picked TV because this sort of saga has been *done* for print before,
but nobody's done it for TV in the US before. It's more of a challenge to do
it here.
I think I have mentioned this before but the more I think about it the more
relevant it seems.
You have created a team, a production company, the is *really damn good* at
bringing first rate SF to the small screen for *tiny little budgets*, and you
don't compromise the details one whit. It seems to me that you write pretty
well anything you want and then dare the SFX people to tell you it can't be
done.
You *cannot* let this all go tits-up when the season ends.
I know you never wanted to be a Producer, I know you're a writer, but the fact
is there are no other production companies putting together great first run SF
shows on-time and on-budget. You *need* to see if you can make this fly with
other peoples work.
Why cna't Babylonian Productions Inc. expand? You could get additional sound
stages, give the people training under your current production staff some
additional opprotunities and get some mileage out of the company spirit you've
already developed.
Just think about it. Other writers are going to know you'll give their work
fair treatment. You've got contacts at TNT and Ted Turner seems to love to
produce new stuff. You could do mini-series, series, TV movies, and use all
the tricks you've come up with keep the production cost down.
You have really made a difference in what is expected of SF television. If you
want proof, may I cal to your attention.
Earth: Final Conflict
ST Voyager
ST DS9
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
and now after *much* revision Sliders.
Every damn one of these shows is sporting *some* kind of an arc. EVEN STAR
TREK where such a thing was ANATHEMA.
Do you remember when they broke up Troy and Riker because the wanted to leave
them available for *aliens*. Geeze, Worf and Dax just got *MARRIED*. Sure they
don't really get it yet, and won't as long as they stick with collective
wriring sessions, but they are at least *moving*.
Babylon 5 without a 5th season would have been unfortunate for the fans and SF
in general.
The end of the production arm of your business would be the most tragic event
in the history of SF, and I am *not* over the top here. YYou are the only
organization in the history of television to do this stuff right,
consistantly, over a course of years, in the United States. The US *dominates*
the world entertainment markets. There is *NO ONE* positioned to pick up the
flag and continue the march if you people go away.
'Course, maybe I'm assuming facts not in evidence. So, tell us, is Netter
already thinking along these lines?
Phil^^^^
FREE MARS!
#: 16536 S2/Bab 5: General
25-Jan-98 00:29:08
Sb: #16321-#Formulaic Television
Fm: J. MICHAEL STRACZYNSKI
Certainly, it's our intent to keep the production team together on
Crusade, once that gets going...if I sold any other shows, we've discussed the
possibility of splitting the team in half, bringing in some new guys on the
current show (whichever that is), and putting half our current team on the new
show, so that both can learn from one another....
But in terms of doing other writers' shows...that's not something I'm
interested in doing. It's just too damned hard to do all this for someone
else's story. I don't want to be the exec supervising somebody else's show;
that would turn me into a Suit, and that would be the end of me.
NDEI, as a separate entity, is better able to handle some of this sort
of thing, but I'm not directly involved with any of that. I know they've got
another project of their own that's nearly solid now, called Rail Runners
(steampunk SF), and I'm confident that they will use the lessons we've learned
on B5 in doing that show, or any others down the road.
We're having an effect on TV more by osmosis than by making it ourselves
in terms of doing other shows...the term 5-year arc is showing up more and
more, first in Dark Skies then Earth: Final Conflict, and now others in the
works...the CGI we pioneered for TV is now showing up in a lot of other
series...and other shows are studying our methods. The Directors Guild
magazine has already done one major article on some new things we're doing,
and another one is due out soon. We've given tours to other producers to show
them how we do what we do. And our directors, some of whom were fairly new to
dramatic TV (having done documentaries and afternoon specials and the like)
before coming to B5 have now become in demand on other shows (you'll note that
a lot of B5 directors are now doing ST shows because they've learned our
methods...which is kinda ironic since no ST directors have done B5 because of
studio pressure not to)....
So the impact is already there, and will continue to grow over the
coming years.
jms
[ Continued in next section -- BB ]
-***
-*** 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