• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

FW: Glen Oliver & LOTR

I said it earlier, and I'll say it again:

JMS knows when he's made a Bad Thing, and he knows when he's made a Good Thing. The years have proved that the general consensus of the B5 community tends to agree with him, too.

He said recently: "Look, how about we actually *see* the thing? I think it may be one of the best things B5 we've ever done. WB had NO NOTES on the thing. SFC had ONE note, to make one word (entil'zha) a bit louder because it's kind of a plot point. Both places referred to it as stunning and beautiful and maybe our best work to date."

(They'll be hard-pressed to do better than Sleeping in Light, IMHO)
smile.gif


If JMS likes it, I'll probably like it. I'm just going to wait and see, like I did with all the major sci-fi releases in past years. Some succeeded, some did not, and some wouldn't go away no matter how much we wished they would:

Star Trek: The Next Generation
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Star Trek: Voyager
Farscape
Babylon 5, seasons 2, 3, 4, and 5
Crusade
B5 TV movies
Star Trek Generations
Star Trek First Contact
Star Trek Insurrection
Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace
Enterprise

The list goes on and on... just wait and see!

------------------
-Londo's Hair
"Vir, intelligence has nothing to do with politics!"
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> Perhaps JMS just does better with regular episodes than movies. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the problem most people have with the movies is that they are very "Stand Alone".

Compared to the intensity of the overall story arc, they are pretty low key. It's difficult to get that sort of intensity into such a short time span.


A similar problem exists in writing a Pilot Movie. It has no real Past Associations for people to hang their opinions on. Even though it is IN the B5 universe, this is a totally NEW story. By its very nature, it cannot start out with a deep emotional hook into the audience.

What a pilot movie IS intended to do is Introduce the new story line and prove interesting enough that people will want MORE.

When they GET More, then the writers can start planting the emotional hooks.
One episode at a time.
It has to build.

The writers and actors here will understand the concept of pacing almost instinctively. It's part and parcel of their crafts.

This isn't a video game shoot 'em up. It can't sustain endless hours of BOOM, BOOM, BANG, BOOM.


Which raises an interesting question:

Are Video games hurting TV and Movie storytelling by numbing the audience (and many future writers) to the reality that stories NEED to vary the pace by providing "low action" sequences in order to allow the audience to appreciate the Highs better??

Contrast is part and parcel of life, but most video games provide nothing but endless "Highs".



------------------
The 3 most common elements in the Universe:
Hydrogen, Greed, Stupidity!
 
Yeah, us B5 fans love the Arc. Most of our favorite episodes are big arc stories, and a lot of people's favorite B5 movie is In the Beginning, which is all arc related.

The video games thing is true, but it's a symptom of a larger condition. People who play video games make up a small portion of the movie viewing population. Entertainment in general has moved more towards fast-paced, action stuff, or "highs," as bakana put it.

As a side note, not all video games are all highs. Role playing games like Final Fantasy are a good balance and quite popular.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bakana:
I think the problem most people have with the movies is that they are very "Stand Alone".

Compared to the intensity of the overall story arc, they are pretty low key. It's difficult to get that sort of intensity into such a short time span.


A similar problem exists in writing a Pilot Movie. It has no real Past Associations for people to hang their opinions on. Even though it is IN the B5 universe, this is a totally NEW story. By its very nature, it cannot start out with a deep emotional hook into the audience.

What a pilot movie IS intended to do is Introduce the new story line and prove interesting enough that people will want MORE.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If it was impossible to create a completely realized, totally affecting work within a two-hour time frame (or less), we wouldn't have a century old, multi-billion dollar art form known as the MOVIE industry, and movies-of-the-week would never be made by TV networks. A good storyteller can tell whatever story he/she wants - and that's a complete, fully-realized story - in a 90-minute to 2-hour timeframe if he/she is competant.

And THEN, a series can be built off of that.

A pilot movie should be the instrument which makes people want to watch the show more. Regular, non-fan, audience members will not make excuses for it like "It'll get better in three seasons" or "You've got to give JMS time". Viewership is often determined by people who will tune out within the first hour if the show doesn't grab them - and they will never come back. There is no margin for error.




------------------
 
Yes, but regular movies do not have the benefit/burden of a 5 year TV series behind it. People watch a movie, for the most part, with a clean slate. Then they decide if they like it or not.

Not so for us. We will be watching the Rangers movie as B5 fans. It is impossible for any of us to imagine what it would be like for a newbie.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> If it was impossible to create a completely realized, totally affecting work within a two-hour time frame (or less), we wouldn't have a century old, multi-billion dollar art form known as the MOVIE industry, and movies-of-the-week would never be made by TV networks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't say it was impossible. I said that it Cannot START with people already hooked.

Although, using the current crop of movies as an example is not necessarily a good analogy.
90% of H'woods output is very forgettable Crap.
Sturgeon's Law in action.
Tossing Millions of dollars at a bad script just gets you a bad Multimillion dollar movie.


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> A good storyteller can tell whatever story he/she wants - and that's a complete, fully-realized story - in a 90-minute to 2-hour timeframe if he/she is competant. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And JMS is Competent. I expect him to give us a good movie. What do YOU expect?



------------------
The 3 most common elements in the Universe:
Hydrogen, Greed, Stupidity!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> Tossing Millions of dollars at a bad script just gets you a bad Multimillion dollar movie. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This sentence is a keeper. Mind if I take it?

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bakana:
And JMS is Competent. I expect him to give us a good movie. What do YOU expect?



<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Better than what I got.

------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> Tossing Millions of dollars at a bad script just gets you a bad Multimillion dollar movie.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes - "To Live and Die in Starlight"

Sad, but true. You don't know how much I wish it weren't the case... But it is.


------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tobias Clutch:
If it was impossible to create a completely realized, totally affecting work within a two-hour time frame (or less), we wouldn't have a century old, multi-billion dollar art form known as the MOVIE industry,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Ever heard of this little thing called budget? Feature films can afford to take 10+ times as long at every stage, trying multiple aproaches until you see what works.

In TV you get one shot. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>A good storyteller can tell whatever story he/she wants - and that's a complete, fully-realized story - in a 90-minute to 2-hour timeframe if he/she is competant.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Not when you're trying to set up a series. A stand alone story would likely feature the characters during the most unique situation of their life. You can also pull out all the tricks - massively changing their relationships, the world, killing a staring actor, etc., and you don't have to deal with the ramifications to the rest of the universe.

The Gathering, for example, would likely have been better if it featured B5 breaking of from the EA, or Sinclair going back in time to become Valen. But it wouldn't be much of a pilot or establish a viable series format.



------------------
You are not entitled to your own opinion. You are only entitled to your own informed opinion.
-- Harlan Ellison quoting Gustave Flaubert

drakh@spamcop.net
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by drakh:
If it was impossible to create a completely realized, totally affecting work within a two-hour time frame (or less), we wouldn't have a century old, multi-billion dollar art form known as the MOVIE industry

Ever heard of this little thing called budget? Feature films can afford to take 10+ times as long at every stage, trying multiple aproaches until you see what works.

In TV you get one shot. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, writers can write really good one-hour episodes on an impossibly tight schedule - which allows for no margin of error - but a TV movie, which allows for more time and budget than an episode, should be held to lesser standards?

------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tobias Clutch:
So, writers can write really good one-hour episodes on an impossibly tight schedule - which allows for no margin of error - but a TV movie, which allows for more time and budget than an episode, should be held to lesser standards?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This was a first episode, with a new cast, new crew and new characters, burdened with the need to establish all the new stuff and bring new viewers up to speed.

It's comparable B5's first showings - The Gathering and Infection (first ep produced). Neither are works of art, and both pale in comparison to a lot of jms' earlier work.


------------------
You are not entitled to your own opinion. You are only entitled to your own informed opinion.
-- Harlan Ellison quoting Gustave Flaubert

drakh@spamcop.net
 
I realized awhile back that B5LR TLaDitS won't be as good as B5 in season 3 & 4 (or maybe even 2) , but I'll still be watching it and loving it because it is a part of the ever expanding B5 universe.


------------------
No one here is exactly what he appears.
G'Kar - Andreas Katsulas

Nothing's the same anymore.
Commander Sinclair - Michael O'Hare

Babylon 5
 
I’m going to assume that Tobias has seen “To Live and Die in Starlight” based on his remarks, but I do have faith in JMS and his competency as far as his track record is concerned. I just hope that with all his extra curricular activities (Jeremiah and various comic books) that he’s not spreading himself to thin. I’m sure he won’t script every episode like B5 but I think his creative energy is key to Rangers success.

------------------
Michael Garibalding: For starters, I don't know you, therefore I don't trust you.
 
I’m going to assume that Tobias has seen “To Live and Die in Starlight” based on his remarks, but I do have faith in JMS and his competency as far as his track record is concerned. I just hope that with all his extra curricular activities (Jeremiah and various comic books) that he’s not spreading himself to thin. I’m sure he won’t script every episode like B5 but I think his creative energy is key to Rangers success.

------------------
Michael Garibalding: For starters, I don't know you, therefore I don't trust you.
 
Sorry about the two-sies. My bad!

------------------
Michael Garibalding: For starters, I don't know you, therefore I don't trust you.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tobias Clutch:
So, writers can write really good one-hour episodes on an impossibly tight schedule - which allows for no margin of error - but a TV movie, which allows for more time and budget than an episode, should be held to lesser standards?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not lesser standards. Different standards. Things aren't as black and white as you make them out to be.

Rangers works if it is a good introduction to the new (hopefully) series.

Here's what I expect from the movie:
- To introduce me to the major characters and briefly explain their motivations for being in their situation (why are they Rangers, why are they aboard the Liandra, etc).
- A logical stand-alone story that may or may not directly relate to the events that take place in the series.

What I'd like:
- Foreshadowing. Of course, we won't know this until a few seasons into Rangers.

This is markedly different than what I came to expect from a B5 episode once I started getting into it:
- To have great dialogue and character development.
- To advance the story arc in a surprising but logical way, or to be a unique or engaging stand alone.
- To generally kick my ass.

Garibalding, for future reference, it's better to edit a duplicate post than to post a third time apologising for the mistake. At the top of each are a series of icons, once of which allows you to edit that post. You can just erase all the text and substitute with a quick explanation, like simply writing the word "double."

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."
 
I think Glenn's comments are interesting because he has actually seen the movie and I've always thought that AICN lost it completely when he left (was it really 4 years ago??!!)
So long as Rangers is better than say River of Souls (which I was still happy to sit through), I think I will be happy and if it matches the brilliance of Call To Arms (far superior to ITB as it actually moved the B5 story onwards), whats the worry?
Glenn never liked Crusade, but I loved it. I even thought that Crusade's characters were better written and acted than B5-so I will judge the movie when I see it and see it for what it is, a pilot.

------------------
'I plan to live forever, or die trying' - Villa Blake's 7
 
I always like things most people don't like. To me, Crusade was much better than B5, while most people hated it.
So the more bad reviews about B5LR, the more hope I have for a great movie.

The only thing I hate is the people who are lucky enough to see the movie months before it airs, are guys (probably Star Trek fans) who don't even like it. Why don't you send the tape to me, I know I will enjoy it!
laugh.gif


------------------
"I don't watch TV. It’s a cultural wasteland filled with inappropriate metaphors and an unrealistic portrayal of life created by the liberal media-elite."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 645 (members: 0, guests: 645)

Share this page

Back
Top