Crusade of Rangers?

[channe]

Oooh.

I can't decide.

I'd like to have both. But, if pressed, I'd definitely say Crusade. It would really depend on my mood - Crusade was a cerebral show, a lot, and it's obvious that Rangers wouldn't be so much cerebral as action-based.

But it's really an unfair comparison. We had thirteen hours of character development for Crusade, and only two for Rangers. Crusade's minor characters got a LOT of fleshing-out, and some were really well-defined, such as Eilerson, and some were just awesomely deep, like Galen and Gideon.

Two hours on Rangers gave Martel, Dulann, Cantrell, and Tirk (to a point) a fair amount of character development, for a pilot. The others, although interesting, were hardly given anything - can you really say you know anything about Tafeek, other than he comes to the stars by a difficult road? It's not the pilot's fault - it's crammed to the gills with insight - but two hours just doesn't compare.

Gah. I really can't decide.

I honestly think that in today's TV environment, Rangers would work a lot better, and admittedly, I did like the pilot very much.

 

[Kribu]

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by A_M_Swallow:
<font color=yellow>Lyta and G'Kar play the hero whilst being on the run. (With help from number one?)</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>
Yes. Oh yes. That would definitely be my first choice. /ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif

But since that seems to be rather unlikely (unless in books ... could we please have some more books?!) ... I want to see the Teep War. A movie, telemovie, miniseries, whatever.

As for Crusade or Rangers - BOTH! *LOL* I liked Crusade, I really did, and would love to see it continue. Then again, I thought Rangers showed a lot of promise (plus the added chance to see G'Kar every now and again... /ubbthreads/images/icons/blush.gif ) and I liked the characters.

The one thing I might watch but am not really interested about would be something to do with David Sheridan ...

*ducks to escape SavantB5's wrath* /ubbthreads/images/icons/grin.gif

I dunno, I was never at all interested in him, probably because I couldn't care less about either Delenn or Sheridan. I did like young David in the Centauri trilogy though, he seemed like a more interesting character than his parents ever were.

 

[channe]

I agree, Kribu. David Sheridan really isn't that *important* in the grand scheme of the B5 universe we know. He has his own story.

Unless you read fanfiction.

 

[KoshN]

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by channe:
<font color=yellow>Crusade was a cerebral show, a lot,
</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

True, and that's what might hurt it's numbers. It seems that a lot of people don't want to go to the effort of thinking, and instead just want to be entertained. *sigh*



<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by channe:
<font color=yellow> and it's obvious that Rangers wouldn't be so much cerebral as action-based.
</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

And this appeals to the people who just want to be entertained, buts turns off the traditional B5/Crusade viewer a bit.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by channe:
<font color=yellow> But it's really an unfair comparison. We had thirteen hours of character development for Crusade, and only two for Rangers.
</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

Definitely!


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by channe:
<font color=yellow> Crusade's minor characters got a LOT of fleshing-out, and some were really well-defined, such as Eilerson, and some were just awesomely deep, like Galen and Gideon.
</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

All three of them got some great lines, that you had to think about, to catch their true significance. Some lines needed to be heard again after having viewed all the episodes, in order to catch some of the links. That much active thinking on the part of the audience, probably limits Crusade's appeal among viewers who just want to be entertained. The key is to keep these viewers entertained until they "get it" or at least stay entertained if they insist of sitting there like a vegetable. /ubbthreads/images/icons/wink.gif


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by channe:
<font color=yellow> I honestly think that in today's TV environment, Rangers would work a lot better,...</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

Crusade could work too, if it had enough action to keep people entertained. Personally, I think that if shown in the correct order, and if the unfilmed scripts were produced, Crusade would fit the bill perfectly.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

i would definately say Crusade. although to be fair i haven't seen Rangers yet...

 

[KoshN]

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by booji:
<font color=yellow>i would definately say Crusade. although to be fair i haven't seen Rangers yet...</font color=yellow><hr></blockquote>

Where in the world are you?

 

[Demon]

Probably in the UK. It hasn't been aired on terrestrial, cable or satellite here yet *sigh* At least not on any of the channels I have access to.

 

[**DONOTDELETE**]

yup in UK
still waiting for Rangers...grrr
although B5 day on Bravo on Monday so yay!

 

[Markas]

I'd also go for both (of course) but if forced to pick, I'd choose Crusade. I think that the impetus for the series is ultimately more interesting because of the circumstances. Earth is at stake and time is running out.

But I WANT BOTH!