[B5JMS] "Babylon 5: The Lost Tales" - A Review (SPOILER Warning)

[b5jms at mail.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu]

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: StarFuryG7 at aol.com
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:32:39 -0700
Lines: 120

***SPOILER Warning: I don't give much away, but read at your own risk
nonetheless if you haven't seen this movie as yet.***

        Okay--what we have here in my view is an A-story and a B-story
and a failure to incorporate and edit the two together to make one
interwoven picture rather than showing the two stories back-to-back
individually. During the television series we often saw episodes in
which this was rather commonplace: an A-story and a B-story, with the
A-story being the primary, more central focus, while the B-story
provided the viewer with something else to pay attention to and take
note of, but which was of lesser importance. Why Joe didn't do it that
way here I can only guess. His direction was fair, but since "Babylon
5" has been out of commission for nearly a decade (not counting either
"Crusade" or "Legend of the Rangers," both of which were spin-offs
with different casts and characters while nevertheless inhabiting the
same universe), I also wonder if this feature would have fared
somewhat better with an experienced director, preferably one who had
helmed episodes of the original series, taking the reigns instead.
        Lochley's story lacked the feel of the station somehow despite
the scenery being accurate, and in that initial scene in the docking
bay, Tracy Scoggins and Alan Scarfe (a fine actor) came off as though
they were just reciting lines and were less than comfortable in their
respective roles. This may have had a lot to do with the fact that
both actors were performing on a bare green screen stage, without the
benefit of an actual constructed set around them to help give them a
feel for where they were supposed to be and put them in the right mood
to more properly deliver their lines. But regardless of the reason,
another take should have been done of that scene. (An experienced
director probably would have noticed this immediately and likely would
have re-shot the scene, although I understand that Joe and the crew
were working under tight time and budget constraints.)
        The ending to this first story was also very anticlimactic,
and came across as a Twilight Zone episode that just didn't quite cut
it. And given the long gap since the series left the air, Joe
definitely should have offered up something with more of an adrenaline
surge to it. The dialogue was for the most part quite good in many
places, but it lacked much needed action.

        In the Sheridan story, which was much better than the first,
you could feel things picking up, and this truly started to feel like
a "Babylon 5" feature, but again, it lacked action unfortunately.
Boxleitner seemed very comfortable in the role, as though he had never
left it in fact, and that was good to see. I believe he really likes
his character. I was also unexpectedly impressed by the actor who
portrayed the Centauri Prince, mainly because his accent was so
reminiscent of Peter Jurasik in the role of Londo Molari and so
utterly dead-on in that regard that I was forced to wonder whether
this actor was a longstanding fan of "Babylon 5" himself. In that
respect, he was utterly superb in the role he played. I also liked the
scene between Sheridan and the reporter early on (and yes, that was
the actress from "Stargate SG-1" if anyone was wondering, not that I
really cared because I never liked that series anyway, and stopped
watching it ages ago, back when it was still airing on Showtime.) That
scene may have struck people as just a throw-in of little or no value
to the overall plot, but it adequately served as a reintroduction to
Sheridan's character, briefly covering the long ten-year gap
(practically) since we last saw him. It was also nice to see that he
hadn't lost his sense of humor after all this time (I rather enjoyed
what he did to the reporter at the end of that scene, and for me
personally, it harkened back to "The Illusion of Truth," and even
though it wasn't the same reporter, she still got what she deserved.)

        The special effects work was good, and it pains me to say
this, especially since it was one of the better attributes of this
production, but I nevertheless think the CGI work in "Legend of the
Rangers" was better. Part of this may well have had to do with the
production budget for this feature. I know, for example, that the
people working on producing the special effects here were putting in
overtime at no charge in order to get the work done, and the lack of a
budget showed, even though Straczynski and his team were able to
squeak by and finish out this feature. That's not necessarily saying
much, however. Why would Warner Bros. issue an enthusiastic press
release concerning their venturing into the direct-to-DVD market
beginning with this release, and then not provide adequate funds to
make the production a bit more impressive? After all, it probably
wouldn't have taken a whole lot more in order to accomplish that
particular goal. Think of what Babylonian Productions was able to
accomplish less than ten years ago with a budget of under a million
dollars an episode for the television series. The sparseness of a set
for Sheridan's interview with the ISN reporter was but one example,
although JMS did a pretty good job of trying to address it by talking
about the Minbari's Spartan way of living, which also had the
convenience of being true within the context of the series.
        At any rate, this story, as with the first, was also
anticlimactic unfortunately. Sheridan does the nice thing rather than
behaving as just a cold-blooded murderer. Did anyone not see that
coming? And both Sheridan and Lochley, in each story, have revelations
based on the words of their counterparts that lead them to a way to
try and resolve the situation.  It smacked a little too much of the
written workings of a singular mind.
        I liked the battle sequence in space in this second story, but
it was too short and seemed out of place. More of that would have been
nice, however, especially if it was contextually relevant to the
story.

A few other things that bothered me:

        Why was Galen able to see thirty years into the future even
though he's a techno-mage?

        Wouldn't Sheridan have some apprehension about taking the
Centauri Prince into his home knowing what Galen said he saw as his
future?

     I want to see more, and I'd love to see the Station bustling with
activity especially the next time. I realize this was something of an
experiment, but more money and resources should have been devoted to
its development. A non-initiated, non-fan of this saga who decided to
buy this DVD and give it a look just wouldn't have been grabbed by it,
sadly. On the plus side, however, is that we know this will be sold to
the Sci Fi Channel and other Basic Cable and syndicated stations
throughout the country and will air as a ninety-minute commercial
movie, even though it's two stories in one. (I'd love to edit this one
myself, and weave the two episodes together more dynamically for my
own private collection.)

Overall Grade opinion: B-




=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "Mac Breck" <macthevorlon at yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 20:15:46 -0400
Lines: 193

<StarFuryG7 at aol.com> wrote in message
news:1186453959.549081.187230 at o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> ***: I don't give much away, but read at your own risk
> nonetheless if you haven't seen this movie as yet.***
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         The special effects work was good, and it pains me to say
> this, especially since it was one of the better attributes of this
> production, but I nevertheless think the CGI work in "Legend of the
> Rangers" was better.

I COMPLETELY disagree with that.  The ONLY things in the B5:LotR pilot
that were better, was the fact that they had SETS, real, physical sets
in the B5:LotR pilot;  and Dulann's line about Tannier having been given
command of The Valen, David's priceless, offscreen reaction, and
Dulann's innocent reply.

In B5-TLT, IMHO, every space shot and model is exquisite.  Ditto for the
planetary background on Minbar.  Hyperspace/Quantumspace entry and exit
vortices, and the almost fabric-like nature of that space itself, are
the best I've ever seen.  :D

Where the CGI in B5:TLT falls down is the background of Lochley's
quarters, the hallways in the first story (except for the hallway in the
very first scene, which looked better than the rest) and the docking bay
in both stories.  In all of those cases, the CGI backgrounds just didn't
look real.  In Lochley's quarters, the lamps looked almost 2D, and the
lampshades looked like one was made and then copied to make the other,
and both were perfectly symmetrical and sharply edged.  The background
looked like an illustration in a magazine, 2D.  Same for the hallways.
They looked too sterile, with an almost "Star Trek: Enterprise" feel to
them.  To me, the docking bay looked too much like a matte painting.
Yes, if you looked closely and viewed the scenes several times, you
could see that almost all the "people" were moving, and moving fairly
believably, but putting the moving fake people next to the moving real
people, Lochley and the priest, and Sheridan and Prince Vintari, made
the fake people "look like" animation.  IMHO, the docking bay scenes
would have looked better (flaws less apparent) if they'd been less
brightly lit, less uniformly lit, and shorter in duration.  The docking
bay needs dirtied-up, and some differences, physical flaws and details
introduced (e.g. scraped paint, caution tape, warning signs, debris on
the floor, maintenance materials lying around, etc.).  Those little
added touches would make it look more real.

One more thing, the destruction scene at NYC was nothing compared to
what a Vorlon or Shadow planetkiller could do.  Galen's line was off the
mark because of that.  Both Sheridan and Galen have seen what those
planetkillers could do.  Heck, even the Centauri use of mass-drivers at
Narn did worse.  Also, those beams would have looked better if they'd
blown up buildings with attendant smoke, fire and flying debris.  In
action, it just didn't look like those beams were doing much.



> Part of this may well have had to do with the
> production budget for this feature. I know, for example, that the
> people working on producing the special effects here were putting in
> overtime at no charge in order to get the work done,

And that's precisely why I HATE to criticize the docking bay at all,
because I know how much work and good intentions went into it (having
read the CG Society articles about B5:TLT).  It was probably just too
ambitious of a shot to try to make on anything less than a $100 million
budget feature film.



> and the lack of a budget showed, even though Straczynski and
> his team were able to squeak by and finish out this feature.

Yes it did show.  Still, what they did produce was impressive in a lot
of ways.



> That's not necessarily saying
> much, however. Why would Warner Bros. issue an enthusiastic press
> release concerning their venturing into the direct-to-DVD market
> beginning with this release, and then not provide adequate funds to
> make the production a bit more impressive?

Because they're tightwads and wanted JMS & Co. to pull off a miracle,
even though Warner Brothers themselves handicaped the production by
losing all the CGI files, and having almost none of the B5 sets, props
and wardrobe available?  HOPEFULLY, the sales of this first DVD will
cause WB to give JMS a lot bigger budget, to include a rebuilding of the
B5 & Crusade sets, CGI , wardrobe and props, and get more of the main
cast and more extras in the future DVDs..



> After all, it probably
> wouldn't have taken a whole lot more in order to accomplish that
> particular goal.

Yes, it would have, because of all that Warner Brothers lost, destroyed
or sold since 1999, when Crusade finished.




> Think of what Babylonian Productions was able to
> accomplish less than ten years ago with a budget of under a million
> dollars an episode for the television series.

Yes, and they built all that stuff up over time.  Looks like 99% of that
is gone (lost, destroyed or sold).  Now, it needs remade, and that costs
money.




>         I liked the battle sequence in space in this second story, but
> it was too short

Agreed.




> and seemed out of place.

Naah.  It was another of Galen's revelations to Sheridan, like the
destruction of NYC.  It fit.



> More of that would have been
> nice, however,

Agreed.



> especially if it was contextually relevant to the
> story.

It was.



>
> A few other things that bothered me:
>
>         Why was Galen able to see thirty years into the future even
> though he's a techno-mage?

JMS explained that.


>         Wouldn't Sheridan have some apprehension about taking the
> Centauri Prince into his home knowing what Galen said he saw as his
> future?

It's in Sheridan's nature to try to make things right, to correct
problems without killing, if possible.



>      I want to see more, and I'd love to see the Station bustling with
> activity especially the next time.

For that you need the sets that were destroyed, to be rebuilt, more
wardrobe made, more main cast and extras.  All that equals more budget.


-- 
Mac Breck (KoshN)
-------------------------------
"Babylon 5: Crusade" (1999)
Galen: "There is always hope, only because it's the one thing that no
one has figured out how to kill yet."

"Brimstone" (1998)
Angel: Oh, there's one more thing you should know. Your fate was never
determined until you killed Gilbert Jax. All in all, you've led a good
life, Ezekiel. Have faith. Your work's appreciated.




=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "jmsatb5 at aol.com" <jmsatb5 at aol.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 16:57:55 -0700
Lines: 29

On Aug 7, 4:15 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor... at yahoo.com> wrote:


> Where the CGI in B5:TLT falls down is the background of Lochley's
> quarters

Lochley's quarters were real, we shot against a real wall (you can see
it in some of the behind-the-scenes footage where I point to it).

> , the hallways in the first story (except for the hallway in the
> very first scene, which looked better than the rest) and the docking bay
> in both stories.  In all of those cases, the CGI backgrounds just didn't
> look real.  In Lochley's quarters, the lamps looked almost 2D, and the
> lampshades looked like one was made and then copied to make the other,
> and both were perfectly symmetrical and sharply edged.  

The lamps were also real.

> The background
> looked like an illustration in a magazine, 2D.  Same for the hallways.
> They looked too sterile, with an almost "Star Trek: Enterprise" feel to
> them.  

The hallway she walks down is also real.  Again, you can see it in the
behind the scenes material.

jms



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: Amy Guskin <aisling at fjordstone.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 00:26:39 GMT
Lines: 22

>> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 19:57:55 -0400, jmsatb5 at aol.com wrote
(in article <1186617475.904648.108330 at j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>):

> On Aug 7, 4:15 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor... at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> Where the CGI in B5:TLT falls down is the background of Lochley's
>> quarters
> 
> Lochley's quarters were real, we shot against a real wall (you can see
> it in some of the behind-the-scenes footage where I point to it). <<

Hee.  I bet you never get tired of this.  My favorite version is the people 
who kept pointing out how fake Don Stroud's scar looked until you told them 
it was real (and how he got it is a great story, by the way). <g>

Amy
-- 
"In my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over 
again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda." - George 
W. Bush, May 24, 2005


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: "jmsatb5 at aol.com" <jmsatb5 at aol.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:44:56 -0700
Lines: 23

On Aug 8, 4:26 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl... at fjordstone.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 19:57:55 -0400, jmsa... at aol.com wrote
>
> (in article <1186617475.904648.108... at j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > On Aug 7, 4:15 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor... at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> Where the CGI in B5:TLT falls down is the background of Lochley's
> >> quarters
>
> > Lochley's quarters were real, we shot against a real wall (you can see
> > it in some of the behind-the-scenes footage where I point to it). <<
>
> Hee.  I bet you never get tired of this.  My favorite version is the people
> who kept pointing out how fake Don Stroud's scar looked until you told them
> it was real (and how he got it is a great story, by the way). <g>
>

We see what we look for and we look for what we think we will see.

jms