Crusade Vs. Star Blazers

[Republibot 3.0]

Forgive me if this has come up before or not on the side, but have we ever discussed the similarities between "Star Blazers" and "Crusade?"

Both have a ticking clock. The Excalibur has 5 years to find a cure for the Drakh plague. THe Argo has 1 year to get a cure for the radiation that is wiping out all life on earth.

Both have a unique ship fighting vastly superior forces (Both technically and in numbers). Both ships have a REALLY BIG GUN in addition to normal weapons. Both ships carry a squadron of space fighters.

In the second season, the Argo runs afoul of earth, and spends a good part of the season as renegades, which is evidently what was going to happen in Season 2 of Crusade.

In the second season, we're also introduced to a new top-of-the-line starship, "The Andromeda." The person in charge of this is a "Captain Gideon."

JMS has gone on record as saying he'd never seen nor heard of Star Blazers prior to Crusade, and, yeah, sure, I believe him. Why would he lie? Obviously he's telling the truth.

Still: it's an awful lot of coincidences.

 

[KoshN]

I never saw Star Blazers, but have heard of it in connection to the Crusade discussion back in ~2000 or so. Wasn't it some sort of cartoon? I never cared enough about it to go look for it. Other than a few episodes of The Simpsons and Charlie Brown/Peanuts specials, and an animated movie once every other blue moon, animated stuff (and stuff like comic books and graphic novels) pretty much isn't my thing.

Exceptions: I do, however like some cartoons, comic books and graphic novels that have been made into live action TV shows and/or movies (e.g. The Tick - on FOX, Human Target - FOX, Pacific Rim, Superman, Batman, etc.), and graphic novel extensions to things that I started out with in a TV show and continued in novels and graphic novels (The Dresden Files. Yes, I know that the novels of The Dresben Files came first. ***I*** saw the TV show first and that led me to the novels, and those led me to the graphic novels.).

I'd be perfectly happy if Crusade could be continued and finished as novels or even graphic novels,


BTW, JMS has also said that in Hollywood, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or imitation is the sincerest form of Hollywood, or something like that .

 

[Republibot 3.0]

I never saw Star Blazers, but have heard of it in connection to the Crusade discussion back in ~2000 or so. Wasn't it some sort of cartoon? I never cared enough about it to go look for it. Other than a few episodes of The Simpsons and Charlie Brown/Peanuts specials, and an animated movie once every other blue moon, animated stuff (and stuff like comic books and graphic novels) pretty much isn't my thing.

[...] BTW, JMS has also said that in Hollywood, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, or imitation is the sincerest form of Hollywood, or something like that .

In a nutshell: A couple centuries hence, mysterious aliens start bombing the earth with asteroids for no adequately explained reason. This kills most of the population, and everyone lives in hastily-constructed underground cities. The earth space force (which has no FTL) attempts to fight the aliens, but is soundly defeated every time. The radiation level on the surface is so bad it's seeping underground, and earth will be sterilized/dead in a year.

A different kind of alien ship crashes on Mars, and the marsbase finds a message from the planet Iskandar offering technology that will save earth, as well as FTL tech. Earth hastily retrofits a sunken World War II battleship (Again, for no adequately explained reason), naming it the "Argo." It, and its crew have to make a mad dash to the lesser magelanic cloud (186,000 LY), pick up the tech, and bring it back to earth in 365 days, or humanity is extinct.

That's season 1. And, yes, it's a poorly-made cartoon. It was MASSIVELY influential on people of my generation, though, because it had a serialized story arc with a definite beginning and an end, and people actually died on it, both of which were unheard of in TV in the '70s.

Again, JMS said he'd never heard of it. I don't really know how that's possible, but I also don't believe he'd lie about something like that, so there you have it.

They made a live-action movie version of it a couple years back which wasn't bad. You can check it out here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u219XPYKNYY

 

[Ragzus]

I think sometimes creators are completely honest about what effects their process and other times they might out of pride deny something then be stuck denying it forever.

I'm not sure if it had any effect on the series if you think of the reasons to use the last space ship to cruse around and meet new people it is the least played reason and it might had been because if they just blew up earth then lol?

But he might of also seen some of it and used it, or somebody else may have and he may have denied it at first only to have to keep denying it to save face he seems honest but sometimes it happens.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

I think sometimes creators are completely honest about what effects their process and other times they might out of pride deny something then be stuck denying it forever.

I'm not sure if it had any effect on the series if you think of the reasons to use the last space ship to cruse around and meet new people it is the least played reason and it might had been because if they just blew up earth then lol?

But he might of also seen some of it and used it, or somebody else may have and he may have denied it at first only to have to keep denying it to save face he seems honest but sometimes it happens.

I've never known Joe to lie, not even when it's in his best interests. I'm sure he'd do it under certain circumstances. He told me once about a time he WOULD have lied if he'd had his wits about him, but was so flustered he didn't know what to do. I get the feeling that he would to save someone from embarasment. But he's not a liar. He's very protective of his friends. He once said that a friend of his said that Crusade wasn't his best work, and even though it's a matter of no importance, he never told anyone who it was. I had a hunch, asked the person I suspected said it, and they fessed up immediately. It was literally no big deal, but to Joe it was a matter of protecting his friend.

So he says he never heard of the show, I believe him.

There's really only two points of direct overlap. One is "Captain Gideon," who's a supporting character in the 2nd season, not a major player, and honestly I forgot the guy's name myself. Totally could be a coincidence.

The other is the plague/timeline-to-extinction thing. We all know that was added to the concept by a TNT guy pretty late in development, and that JMS didn't really like it much and intended to dispense with it ASAP.

Take those two things away and there's no real overwhelmign similarity to Star Blazers. One of them is trivial, and one of 'em is something JMS didn't think up, but had foisted off on him.

That said: the TNT exec who stuck JMS with that might have seen Star Blazers...

 

[Ragzus]

I think sometimes creators are completely honest about what effects their process and other times they might out of pride deny something then be stuck denying it forever.

I'm not sure if it had any effect on the series if you think of the reasons to use the last space ship to cruse around and meet new people it is the least played reason and it might had been because if they just blew up earth then lol?

But he might of also seen some of it and used it, or somebody else may have and he may have denied it at first only to have to keep denying it to save face he seems honest but sometimes it happens.

I've never known Joe to lie, not even when it's in his best interests. I'm sure he'd do it under certain circumstances. He told me once about a time he WOULD have lied if he'd had his wits about him, but was so flustered he didn't know what to do. I get the feeling that he would to save someone from embarasment. But he's not a liar. He's very protective of his friends. He once said that a friend of his said that Crusade wasn't his best work, and even though it's a matter of no importance, he never told anyone who it was. I had a hunch, asked the person I suspected said it, and they fessed up immediately. It was literally no big deal, but to Joe it was a matter of protecting his friend.

So he says he never heard of the show, I believe him.

There's really only two points of direct overlap. One is "Captain Gideon," who's a supporting character in the 2nd season, not a major player, and honestly I forgot the guy's name myself. Totally could be a coincidence.

The other is the plague/timeline-to-extinction thing. We all know that was added to the concept by a TNT guy pretty late in development, and that JMS didn't really like it much and intended to dispense with it ASAP.

Take those two things away and there's no real overwhelmign similarity to Star Blazers. One of them is trivial, and one of 'em is something JMS didn't think up, but had foisted off on him.

That said: the TNT exec who stuck JMS with that might have seen Star Blazers...

Yeah he seems honest, but i've heard him speak about the Clauia "mess" and some other actors and he's clearly holding back the truth in those cases.
I haven't seen the mentioned series but from what you say if those are the only two things similar then i'd agree it can easily be a coincidence.
The whole "earth is dying you have *this* long to save it, doesn't seem like an uncommon plot thought up by people as some money grabbers like to use timers to make things more dramatic which i don't really think works.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

Yeah he seems honest, but i've heard him speak about the Clauia "mess" and some other actors and he's clearly holding back the truth in those cases.
I haven't seen the mentioned series but from what you say if those are the only two things similar then i'd agree it can easily be a coincidence.
The whole "earth is dying you have *this* long to save it, doesn't seem like an uncommon plot thought up by people as some money grabbers like to use timers to make things more dramatic which i don't really think works.

Well, "Holding back" isn't lying. I mean, what's he going to say, "Bruce Boxleitner is a jerk who's hard to work with?" Bruce is a working actor, such things could only adversely effect his career. There's no point in saying things like that, unless you want revenge. Also, talking trash about your cast is a good way to find yourself unable to get actors for future projects. Who wants to work for a producer who's going to endanger their future career? It's just bad business all around.

Incidentally, Bruce is not a jerk. Everyone who knows him says he's the nicest guy in the world, and very professional.

Conversely, they had a lot of problems with Sinclair, and JMS refused to explain until after the guy died. And I know they had a LOT of problems with Andrea Thompson, who was evidently something of a nightmare to work with, but he's never said a bad word about her. The closest you're ever going to get to JMS saying "I never want to work with them again" is when he kills someone's character off offscreen. Such as her, or General Hague, or KoDath.

 

[Ragzus]

Yeah he seems honest, but i've heard him speak about the Clauia "mess" and some other actors and he's clearly holding back the truth in those cases.
I haven't seen the mentioned series but from what you say if those are the only two things similar then i'd agree it can easily be a coincidence.
The whole "earth is dying you have *this* long to save it, doesn't seem like an uncommon plot thought up by people as some money grabbers like to use timers to make things more dramatic which i don't really think works.

Well, "Holding back" isn't lying. I mean, what's he going to say, "Bruce Boxleitner is a jerk who's hard to work with?" Bruce is a working actor, such things could only adversely effect his career. There's no point in saying things like that, unless you want revenge. Also, talking trash about your cast is a good way to find yourself unable to get actors for future projects. Who wants to work for a producer who's going to endanger their future career? It's just bad business all around.

Incidentally, Bruce is not a jerk. Everyone who knows him says he's the nicest guy in the world, and very professional.

Conversely, they had a lot of problems with Sinclair, and JMS refused to explain until after the guy died. And I know they had a LOT of problems with Andrea Thompson, who was evidently something of a nightmare to work with, but he's never said a bad word about her. The closest you're ever going to get to JMS saying "I never want to work with them again" is when he kills someone's character off offscreen. Such as her, or General Hague, or KoDath.

Yeah from what i can *gather* (using character names because finding correct spelling would take me a while lol)
Sinclar Lyta Taila Susan - seemed to have caused issues.
But yeah even JMS said you know actors have their own opinions and objectives and lives and stuff just happens sometimes.

I like how he didn't really call anyone out though we know the story overall would've been better had there not been the problems there were.

Though JMS did so well in having back doors the only person i was really disapointed about leaving was Susan/Claudia because when the others left he made the story adapt so well to it, But season 5 was somewhat a mess, even without the loss of susan i'm not sure it would've helped much.

We are somewhat off topic however lol

 

[Republibot 3.0]

Though JMS did so well in having back doors the only person i was really disapointed about leaving was Susan/Claudia because when the others left he made the story adapt so well to it, But season 5 was somewhat a mess, even without the loss of susan i'm not sure it would've helped much.

We are somewhat off topic however lol

Ugh. They couldn't get rid of Talia soon enough to suit me. She was just a terrible character and a terrible actress and really poorly written.

Losing Ivonova really hurt, though, I agree.

 

[Ragzus]

Though JMS did so well in having back doors the only person i was really disapointed about leaving was Susan/Claudia because when the others left he made the story adapt so well to it, But season 5 was somewhat a mess, even without the loss of susan i'm not sure it would've helped much.

We are somewhat off topic however lol

Ugh. They couldn't get rid of Talia soon enough to suit me. She was just a terrible character and a terrible actress and really poorly written.

Losing Ivonova really hurt, though, I agree.

I didn't like Talia much the only part i could stand was the funny bits when she interacted with the somewhat pervvy chief Micheal lol
I can't say i really dislike the new captain in season 5 but because she isn't susan i just can't get behind her.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

Though JMS did so well in having back doors the only person i was really disapointed about leaving was Susan/Claudia because when the others left he made the story adapt so well to it, But season 5 was somewhat a mess, even without the loss of susan i'm not sure it would've helped much.

We are somewhat off topic however lol

Ugh. They couldn't get rid of Talia soon enough to suit me. She was just a terrible character and a terrible actress and really poorly written.

Losing Ivonova really hurt, though, I agree.

I didn't like Talia much the only part i could stand was the funny bits when she interacted with the somewhat pervvy chief Micheal lol
I can't say i really dislike the new captain in season 5 but because she isn't susan i just can't get behind her.

Lochley just didn't work on B5. I don't blame the actress, she was just badly written and her character seemed forced. I mean, in "A view from the gallery" one of the doofuses says "All I can tell you is this: If it came down to it, I'd want her watching my back" or some such drivel. It's the FOURTH EPISODE OF THE SEASON! We're having this crap forced down our throats? Characters grow. We LEARN if they're badasses or not. We see them do badass stuff, or we don't. We don't get told by a 4th-bananna guest star in a filler episode.

Conversely, I really liked her on Crusade. She fit in great there.

 

[JoeD80]

I do understand the point about show don't tell. I think Joe was trying to get the audience to buy in to Lochley being around too quickly perhaps. However I really like her performance later in the season when she and Garibaldi have their confrontation about addiction.

Just an aside, which has nothing to do with you personally but just a personal pet peeve: I really hate the use of this term "filler episode". Makes it too easy to ignore content and not critically think about what the particular story is trying to accomplish.

 

[Springer]

Ugh. They couldn't get rid of Talia soon enough to suit me. She was just a terrible character and a terrible actress and really poorly written.

Really? I thought both character and actress were far superior to Lyta/Pat Tallman and I was disappointed when Andrea Thompson left.

Lochley grew on me, I have to say. I think part of the problem was that she wasn't considered part of the gang. JMS made sure of that by pointedly saying she was on the other side in the civil war and coming on the back of Ivanova I think the audience too were wary of her. But while she was no Ivanova, admittedly, I was looking forward to seeing her character grow in Crusade and other post-B5 stories where Lochley seemed to fit much better. And considering the material she had to work with in River of Souls, I thought she stood out quite well in that.

 

[Jan]

I liked Lochley from the start. I understood her coming in with a bit of a poker up her butt - pretty much every new boss, military or not, does. I liked that she thought things through and wasn't the slightest bit like Ivanova - to whom I was completely lukewarm. I prefer thinkers like Lochley to shouters like Ivanova.

I think she got more character development in one season than Ivanova did and I *loved* her confrontations with Garibaldi.

BTW...when somebody ways things like '...was poorly written..." could I suggest an example? Because chances are, without the kind of credentials to match the one who actually did write what you're complaining about, what you're actually saying is a grandiose "I just didn't like it".

(I'm in the 'I liked Lyta/Pat much better than Talia/Andrea' camp)

Jan

 

[Springer]

I liked Lochley from the start. I understood her coming in with a bit of a poker up her butt - pretty much every new boss, military or not, does. I liked that she thought things through and wasn't the slightest bit like Ivanova - to whom I was completely lukewarm. I prefer thinkers like Lochley to shouters like Ivanova.

You seem to be implying that Ivanova didn't think things through. Ivanova seemed quite astute at thinking things through and coming up with solutions, but the difference is that Ivanova had a flamboyant personality whereas Lochley didn't as much. So Ivanova's solutions to, for example, the threats from the ships of the non-aligned worlds in Deathwalker, the Lumati, the Drazi fighting, come across as more colourful maybe, but doesn't mean she spent any less time thinking things through. I do think the series lost a bit of energy without Ivanova (and Marcus) that JMS neglected to replace when Lochley came onboard. That's not really Lochley's or Tracy Scoggins' fault though.

I think she got more character development in one season than Ivanova did and I *loved* her confrontations with Garibaldi.

I would agree there, if we are talking first seasons. Ivanova didn't get much to do in the first season and it was something Claudia complained about. Seasons 2, 3 and 4 there was plenty of development for her.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

I do understand the point about show don't tell. I think Joe was trying to get the audience to buy in to Lochley being around too quickly perhaps. However I really like her performance later in the season when she and Garibaldi have their confrontation about addiction.

Well, by then she's earned it, hadn't she? I mean we knew her, we knew him, it was an honest scene, it was well acted. It worked. It was real. It wasn't someone we've never heard of before and will never hear of again telling us how we're supposed to feel in a very ham-fisted way.

Just an aside, which has nothing to do with you personally but just a personal pet peeve: I really hate the use of this term "filler episode". Makes it too easy to ignore content and not critically think about what the particular story is trying to accomplish.

Fair enough. For me, personally, I have three categories. This is my own system, no one else is beholden to it. There's Standalones, Arcs, and Fillers. "Believers" is a standalone. It's a good solid story with a beginning, a middle, and an end, and it's self-contained. Arc episodes are things like "And the Sky Full of Stars" and "Signs and Portents" and stuff like that. "Eyes" is filler. It's only there because they had to have 22 eps, and it introduces nothing of importance, nor is it a self-contained story. Heck, it's basically a clipshow minus the clips.

It's sometimes hard to tell the difference between a Filler and a Standalone. TKO, for instance, has elements of both. The Ivonova stuff is a good Standalone subject, The Mutai is just filler, though. That's my system, just so you'll know what I"m talking about when I say it.

It's irrespective of "Good" or "Bad," by the way. It's not a value judgement, it's more of a structural observation. Though in general, "Filler" episodes tend to be pretty weak.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

Ugh. They couldn't get rid of Talia soon enough to suit me. She was just a terrible character and a terrible actress and really poorly written.

Really? I thought both character and actress were far superior to Lyta/Pat Tallman and I was disappointed when Andrea Thompson left.

We'll have to agree to disagree there. I'll be the first one to admit that Pat (no disrespect intended) isn't a master thespian, but neither is Andrea. Also, Pat was just more likeable, and Andrea had an icy bitch quality that I don't think was intentional. Basically, when Lyta said she couldn't scan someone for whatever reason, it came across as far less tedious than when Talia said she couldn't.

Lochley grew on me, I have to say. I think part of the problem was that she wasn't considered part of the gang. JMS made sure of that by pointedly saying she was on the other side in the civil war and coming on the back of Ivanova I think the audience too were wary of her. But while she was no Ivanova, admittedly, I was looking forward to seeing her character grow in Crusade and other post-B5 stories where Lochley seemed to fit much better. And considering the material she had to work with in River of Souls, I thought she stood out quite well in that.

Yeah, I'll go along with that.

 

[Republibot 3.0]

BTW...when somebody ways things like '...was poorly written..." could I suggest an example? Because chances are, without the kind of credentials to match the one who actually did write what you're complaining about, what you're actually saying is a grandiose "I just didn't like it".

Sure! That's a good question!

Ok, I already mentioned the scene from "A view from the gallery" where random guest stars inform us that we HAVE to like Lochley, and that she's a total badass. That's an example of bad writing because she hasn't earned that kind of regard from us yet.

In fact, I consider that entire episode to be an example of a good idea that was very poorly written/executed. I didn't like either Mac or Bo, and it felt very stagey, even though some of their lines were pretty good. The discussion of the floor-cleaners was clever, but the delivery killed it. The discussion of 'tastes like chicken' was not clever, and the delivery was bad. And the whole episode felt forced. An enemy we've never heard of before or since does more damage to B5 than the entire Shadow War and the Civil War managed - combined - and yet there's no repercussions. The point was just a forced plot to give our two goofuses a reason to fall through random encounters with people we already know, and show us how they look to "The little people." The episode just didn't work.

Compare the same idea used in TNG: "Lower Decks." Now, I'm well-known for my hyper-criticism of Trek in general and TNG in specific, but that was a damn good episode that covers most of the same ground in a much more organic fashion, and more effectively.

I have a lot of the same problems with "The Illusion of Truth." It's a really clever idea, but it's poorly executed. In order to get the soundbites the reporter needs for his propagandistic view of B5, JMS has to make all his characters act in very self-conscious ways, saying things they wouldn't normally say or reacting in ways they wouldn't normally, so the whole episode feels false and contrived.

Is that the kind of thing you're talking about?

 

[Republibot 3.0]

You seem to be implying that Ivanova didn't think things through. Ivanova seemed quite astute at thinking things through and coming up with solutions, but the difference is that Ivanova had a flamboyant personality whereas Lochley didn't as much. So Ivanova's solutions to, for example, the threats from the ships of the non-aligned worlds in Deathwalker, the Lumati, the Drazi fighting, come across as more colourful maybe, but doesn't mean she spent any less time thinking things through.

Yeah. Ivonova was SMART. She made it to full commander in about 10 years. Granted, JMS has always been a bit squishy about ranks and stuff - I don't know if he doesn't understand it, or if he's deliberately avoiding it - but if you compare that to promotions in the Navy or Air Force (Where she'd be a Lt. Colonel) that is INSANELY fast. (For comparison sake, my late father-in-law and my brother in law are both career navy men with exemplary records, and both made full commander in about 15 years. For most people it takes far more time, and most people never get that far).

Even coming out of a major war which presumably killed off most of the officer corps, that's still INSANELY fast promotion. And, yeah, we never actually saw Ivonova do anything stupid.

 

[Jan]

BTW...when somebody ways things like '...was poorly written..." could I suggest an example? Because chances are, without the kind of credentials to match the one who actually did write what you're complaining about, what you're actually saying is a grandiose "I just didn't like it".

Sure! That's a good question!

Ok, I already mentioned the scene from "A view from the gallery" where random guest stars inform us that we HAVE to like Lochley, and that she's a total badass. That's an example of bad writing because she hasn't earned that kind of regard from us yet.

Okay, that makes sense. Except that you're overlooking the next part, where JMS practically breaks the fourth wall and addresses the rumors going around the station about why Ivanova left. We were just shown Lochley in action and a character voiced an opinion vs rumors floating around about her and about Ivanova. The two together pretty much equal 'wait and see' to me.

In fact, I consider that entire episode to be an example of a good idea that was very poorly written/executed. I didn't like either Mac or Bo, and it felt very stagey, even though some of their lines were pretty good. The discussion of the floor-cleaners was clever, but the delivery killed it. The discussion of 'tastes like chicken' was not clever, and the delivery was bad. And the whole episode felt forced. An enemy we've never heard of before or since does more damage to B5 than the entire Shadow War and the Civil War managed - combined - and yet there's no repercussions. The point was just a forced plot to give our two goofuses a reason to fall through random encounters with people we already know, and show us how they look to "The little people." The episode just didn't work.

For you. I on the other hand loved it, especially the chemistry between Mac and Bo. Much the way I loved the first season episodes which expanded the universe and station to more than the command staff. You have a point about the 'raiders' except that nameless raiders have always been the threat of the day on B5, hardly ever being caught or pursued. And there really wasn't that much damage, as I recall.

I have a lot of the same problems with "The Illusion of Truth." It's a really clever idea, but it's poorly executed. In order to get the soundbites the reporter needs for his propagandistic view of B5, JMS has to make all his characters act in very self-conscious ways, saying things they wouldn't normally say or reacting in ways they wouldn't normally, so the whole episode feels false and contrived.

Need another real example here. Because what made that episode effective was the re-editing of the questions. You may actually be right to an extent but for a one-episode message, TV generally needs to be a bit on the obvious side. It also was done in the mid-90s when most of us were still thinking that news held an amount of responsibility. Silly us.

Jan