Legend of the rangers first time viewing.

[HexDSL]

as i said in my last post i have only recently come to watch Babylon 5 and am enjoying the experience greatly.

I have just got to The Legend of the Rangers and darn it, its a little flawed isnt it? so far everything i have seen from B5 has been very well written and acted superbly however Legend of the Rangers is not to the same standard and i was a little disappointed by it.

the basix plot was sound and i liked what it was trying to do but i have some objections to some small points

1) whats this about rangers getting in trouble for wisely leaving a battle? i don't remember any reference to this with Marcus Cole when he chose to leave a battle. it seams like an odd direction to take the seemingly well balanced and wise ranger group.

2) what the hell was all that kicking and punching to fire the ships guns about? its stupid in concept and design. there is no was floating about and punching the air is more intuitive than selecting targets on a console. it made me face palm quite readily.

3) the rangers lacked the quiet calm and innate understanding that we saw from the otehrs that where in the precious episodes. i get that they where all supposed to be a little rebellious but it didn't work for me.

its not all bad though it was a fun story and i really liked the haunted ship idea as well as the return of G'kar. was it intended to be the pilot for a series or was it always meant to be a stand alone story?


if anyone has any thoughts on this i would love to hear them

 

[Sindatur]

1. Rangers aren't supposed to back down from a fight, so yea, you're pretty much supposed to fight to the death, if necessary. This is definitely a weakness fo the Rangers, that they don't believe in Strategic Withdrawl.

2. The "Windmill" weapons system. Budget apparently messed things up, and that's what we ended up with. Apparently it looked cooler on paper

Yes, this was a Pilot for a new Series that was hoped to run on SciFi Channel (Now SyFy). The Gathering (The original Babylon 5 Pilot) was pretty flawed too, so, hopefully, things would've settled much better once it went to series and got a few episodes under it's belt. Sadly, it didn't make it. Part of the failure was possibly due to 9/11 interupting NFL Football schedule, and the Superbowl(?) being delayed and airing the night of the Pilot's premiere.

 

[KoshN]

as i said in my last post i have only recently come to watch Babylon 5 and am enjoying the experience greatly.

I have just got to The Legend of the Rangers and darn it, its a little flawed isnt it? so far everything i have seen from B5 has been very well written and acted superbly however Legend of the Rangers is not to the same standard and i was a little disappointed by it.

First, let me say that this is just about the only thing in the B5 universe that I don't like to rewatch. It's tied with the Season 1 episode "Believers." Jan is much more forgiving of the Legend of the Rangers backdoor pilot/TV movie than I am.


A little flawed? It's A LOT flawed. I feel bad that this awful TV movie was Andreas' last appearance as G'Kar. I wish all traces of this TV movie could be erased or burned.

the basix plot was sound and i liked what it was trying to do but i have some objections to some small points

1) whats this about rangers getting in trouble for wisely leaving a battle? i don't remember any reference to this with Marcus Cole when he chose to leave a battle. it seams like an odd direction to take the seemingly well balanced and wise ranger group.

That policy of the Ranger Council, and the Ranger Council itself, is not consistent with Ranger policy of ~2258-2262, but this took place in 2265 so things may have changed. Note that the Minbari do not always act reasonably (See "Rumors, Bargains and Lies."). We didn't see Rangers much during Crusade (thanks to the SOBs at TNT.), so we don't KNOW if they were that way ~12/2266-2267.

2) what the hell was all that kicking and punching to fire the ships guns about? its stupid in concept and design. there is no was floating about and punching the air is more intuitive than selecting targets on a console. it made me face palm quite readily.

That was a direct result of meager TV movie budget which did not support the original idea of a weapons chair. I found the method of firing seen in the TV movie to be both laughably bad and cringe-worthy. Part of the problem is that while B5 was done on a tight budget, the CGI effects, sets, prosthetics, wardrobe and props were built-up and perfected over the years, A LOT of those resources were lost, sold or destroyed (squandered by Warner Brothers, who never seemed to have much faith in anything B5.) between when Crusade went down in 1999 and when the Legend of the Rangers TV movie was made in 2001.

3) the rangers lacked the quiet calm and innate understanding that we saw from the otehrs that where in the precious episodes. i get that they where all supposed to be a little rebellious but it didn't work for me.

Marcus would be doing several thousand RPM in his cryo-tube.

its not all bad though it was a fun story and i really liked the haunted ship idea as well as the return of G'kar. was it intended to be the pilot for a series or was it always meant to be a stand alone story?


if anyone has any thoughts on this i would love to hear them

Like I said further up, it was a backdoor pilot/TV movie. It got KILLED in the ratings on the east coast of the USA by a football playoff game. So, The Sci-Fi Channel didn't pick it up for a TV series. However, the combination of Sci-Fi Channel cheapness and stupidity and Warner Brothers ineptness, carelessness and lack of stewardship resulted in it being truly BAD.

It fits right in with being a Sci-Fi Channel Original, and by that I mean BAD. JMS wanted to do a continuation/wrap-up of Crusade, but The Sci-Fi Channel wouldn't go for that. They wanted a new B5 universe show with a 20-something cast. So, JMS set the TV movie in 2265, so the show would lead into the A Call to Arms/Crusade years (12/2266-12/2272), which would allow him to wrap up the Crusade storyline.


It seems that where B5 and Crusade are concerned, JMS is almost ALWAYS fighting an uphill battle against impossible odds, carelessness, lack of faith, arrogance and stupidity. It's a MIRACLE that we got as much of B5 and Crusade as we did.

 

[Triple F]

The cost was a factor, but there was others as well.

It soon became clear this single prop/set would be more difficult and time consuming to design and implement than many of the full standing sets in the show. But the concept was also an extremely difficult sell at the time, not only to the network but some of the artists and crew as well. Today of course, the idea of someone sitting in a chair and manipulating complex weapons systems is commonplace (Atlantis) but way back in the year 2000 it was thought the audience would find the scenario boring and confusing!

http://www.foundation3d.com/B5Scrolls/#Screen1_06_2
(gives me an excuse to point to one of the mirror sites that ‘scrolls is now on

I don’t know if LoTR was any more meagrely funded than any other tv movie, but based on a few of the other exec decisions surrounding it, there did seem to be a real lack of understanding of B5’s history and what the viewer may or may not have understood.

(Bolts rather than beams being the end result of some screwy thinking, which was one of the many small things that left fans feeling it wasn't B5 as such). Having a new crew doing the fx didn’t help much as virtually none of them had even heard of Babylon 5.

 

[KoshN]

I don’t know if LoTR was any more meagrely funded than any other tv movie,

It had about the same budget as every other B5 TV movie, BUT it didn't have the rich library of B5 resources that was available to every B5 movie other than The Gathering.

 

[HexDSL]

i WAS trying to be delicate. now i see that its a facepalm on behalf of most the community i can say.... Weapon pod thing AND choice of actress was a MASSIVE fail and made me slam my head into my hand hard enough to need a doctor.

if it had have been the first B5 scene i had ever seen i would never have looked again.

thanks for the link to scrolls sire though.

 

[KoshN]

1. Rangers aren't supposed to back down from a fight, so yea, you're pretty much supposed to fight to the death, if necessary.

Key Words: IF NECESSARY.

This is definitely a weakness fo the Rangers, that they don't believe in Strategic Withdrawl.

They USED TO BE smart and interested in strategic withdrawl.

 

[KoshN]

i WAS trying to be delicate. now i see that its a facepalm on behalf of most the community i can say.... Weapon pod thing AND choice of actress

That, too. Sirois was bad throughout the movie, but part of the problems may have been her terrible lines.


The characters of Dulann (the XO of the Liandra), Na'feel and Firell were good though.

was a MASSIVE fail and made me slam my head into my hand hard enough to need a doctor.

It made me feel embarrassed in front of the friends I convinced to watch the movie.

 

[HexDSL]

Now i have watched all of it thought, evey movie, and episode from the b5 universe all that's left now it to rewatch it from teh start. this time though i think ill do it in a different order. no matter how bad LoTR was i am not sure i could skip it next time. bad b5 is better than no b5 i suppose.

strange though, The lost tales was really great if a bit short. its strange how different in terms of quality the last two offerings could be.

 

[KoshN]

Now i have watched all of it thought, evey movie, and episode from the b5 universe all that's left now it to rewatch it from teh start. this time though i think ill do it in a different order. no matter how bad LoTR was i am not sure i could skip it next time. bad b5 is better than no b5 i suppose.

strange though, The lost tales was really great if a bit short. its strange how different in terms of quality the last two offerings could be.

You still have the following ahead of you:

Title: Book #7 The Shadow Within
Author: Cavelos, Jeanne
Timeframe: 11/2256 - 01/2257
Isbn1: 0-440-22348-2
Copyright1: April 1997
Publisher1: Dell
Isbn2: 0-345-45218-6
Copyright2: December 2002
Publisher2: DelRey

Title: Book #9 To Dream in the City of Sorrows
Author: Drennan, Kathryn M.
Timeframe: Marcus in 10/2260, recalling events of 1/2259-9/2260.
Isbn1: 0-440-22354-7
Copyright1: July 1997
Publisher1: Dell
Isbn2: 0-345-45219-4
Copyright2: July 2003
Publisher2: DelRey

Title: Dark Genesis - The Birth of the Psi Corps
Author: Keyes, J. Gregory
Timeframe: 2115-2189
Isbn1: 0-345-42715-7
Copyright1: October 1998
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Deadly Relations - Bester Ascendant
Author: Keyes, J. Gregory
Timeframe: 2189-2258
Isbn1: 0-345-42716-5
Copyright1: March 1999
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Final Reckoning - The Fate of Bester
Author: Keyes, J. Gregory
Timeframe: 2271-2281
Isbn1: 0-345-42717-3
Copyright1: October 1999
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Legions of Fire - Book I - The Long Night of Centauri Prime
Author: David, Peter
Timeframe: ~10/2262-12/2266. Dates corrected to line up with A Call to Arms and Crusade.
Isbn1: 0-345-42718-1
Copyright1: December 1999
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Legions of Fire - Book II - Armies of Light and Dark
Author: David, Peter
Timeframe: 12/14/2266-04/18/2272. Dates corrected to line up with A Call to Arms and Crusade.
Isbn1: 0-345-42719-X
Copyright1: May 2000
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Legions of Fire - Book III - Out of the Darkness
Author: David, Peter
Timeframe: 05/14/2273-01/21/2277. Dates corrected to line up with A Call to Arms and Crusade.
Isbn1: 0-345-42720-3
ISBN-13: 978-0-345-42720-5
Copyright1: November 2000
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: The Passing of the Techno-Mages - Book I - Casting Shadows
Author: Cavelos, Jeanne
Timeframe: 11/2258-12/31/2258
Isbn1: 0-345-42721-1
Copyright1: March 2001
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: The Passing of the Techno-Mages - Book II - Summoning Light
Author: Cavelos, Jeanne
Timeframe: 1/2259-2/2259
Isbn1: 0-345-42722-X
ISBN-13: 978-0-345-42722-9
Copyright1: July 2001
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: The Passing of the Techno-Mages - Book III - Invoking Darkness
Author: Cavelos, Jeanne
Timeframe: 8/2260-2261
Isbn1: 0-345-43833-7
Copyright1: December 2001
Publisher1: DelRey


OMNIBUS EDITIONS OF THE DEL REY TRILOGIES

"The Psi Corps Trilogy"
by J. Gregory Keyes
Product Details
Hardcover: 712 pages
Publisher: Science Fiction Book Club (January 1, 1999)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0739406566
ISBN-13: 978-0739406564


"Legions of Fire"
by Peter David
Product Details
Hardcover: 733 pages
Publisher: Science Fiction Book Club; 1st edition (2000)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 0739414852
ISBN-13: 978-0739414859


"The Passing Of The Techno-Mages"
by Jeanne Cavelos
Product Details
Hardcover: 874 pages
Publisher: Science Fiction BookClub; 1st edition (2002)
ISBN-10: 0739423959
ISBN-13: 978-0739423950


NOVELIZATIONS:

Title: A Call to Arms
Author: Sheckley, Robert
Timeframe: 12/2266-01/2267
Isbn1: 0-345-43155-3
Copyright1: January 1999
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: In the Beginning
Author: David, Peter
Timeframe: Events of 2245-2248, as told by Londo in 01/2277.
Isbn1: 0-345-42452-2
Copyright1: January 1998
Publisher1: DelRey

Title: Thirdspace
Author: David, Peter
Timeframe: 6/2261
Isbn1: 0-345-42454-9
Copyright1: July 1998
Publisher1: DelRey


SHORT STORIES (all out of print):

Title: The Shadow of His Thoughts
Author: Straczynski, J. M.
Timeframe: 10/2262
Ss_pub_in: Amazing Stories
Ss_issue: Summer 1999, Number 597
Ss_commnts: The Londo Story

Title: Genius Loci
Author: Straczynski, J. M.
Timeframe: 01/2263
Ss_pub_in: Amazing Stories
Ss_issue: Winter 2000, Number 599
Ss_commnts: The Lyta / G'Kar Story

Title: Space, Time, and the Incurable Romantic
Author: Straczynski, J. M.
Timeframe: 2560-2592
Ss_pub_in: Amazing Stories
Ss_issue: Summer 2000, Number 602
Ss_commnts: The Marcus / Ivanova Story

Title: Hidden Agendas
Author: Straczynski, J. M.
Timeframe: 2262
Ss_pub_in: Babylon 5/Crusade Magazine
Ss_issue: May 2000, Number 22
Ss_commnts: The Ivanova/Warlock Destroyer/Ulkesh's Vorlon
Transport/Sheridan/Lyta Story

Title: True Seeker
Author: Avery, Fiona
Timeframe: late 2269
Ss_pub_in: Babylon 5/Crusade Magazine
Ss_issue: July 2000, Number 23
Ss_commnts: The Narn Story (carries on from episode 17 "Legacies" http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/guide/017.html )

Title: The Nautilus Coil
Author: Keyes, J. Gregory
Timeframe: 2263, or maybe even sometime in 2264
Ss_pub_in: Babylon 5/Crusade Magazine
Ss_issue: August 2000, Number 24
Ss_commnts: The Garibaldi/Lyta/Psi Corp/Vorlon story. Connects with "Dark Genesis - The Birth of the Psi Corps"
*************

ISBN-13 Online Converter
http://www.isbn.org/converterpub.asp

 

[Jan]

1) whats this about rangers getting in trouble for wisely leaving a battle? i don't remember any reference to this with Marcus Cole when he chose to leave a battle. it seams like an odd direction to take the seemingly well balanced and wise ranger group.

Yes and no. The Minbari are generally inclined to *never* leave a battle un-won. Remember how Delenn escaped from the Drakh back in "Lines of Communication"? Her ship had gotten away and then she turned back to destroy them. I forget the episode but somebody (Franklin, maybe?) also commented on the Minbari never backing down during the E/M war. In Rangers this was greatly exaggerated but then JMS mentioned that we'd have found out that there were considerable issues with the Ranger Council that the crew would have discovered if the show had gone to series.

2) what the hell was all that kicking and punching to fire the ships guns about? its stupid in concept and design. there is no was floating about and punching the air is more intuitive than selecting targets on a console. it made me face palm quite readily.

That's not how it was described in the script. One of the first times I think we saw Mike Vejar's instincts be wrong. Still, the breathtaking effects shot of her hanging in space forgives much as far as I'm concerned.

3) the rangers lacked the quiet calm and innate understanding that we saw from the otehrs that where in the precious episodes. i get that they where all supposed to be a little rebellious but it didn't work for me.

I'm not sure I'm following you on this one. Just about all of the younger Rangers that we saw had a number of flaws. Think back to Findell in "Meditations on the Abyss" and the two in "Learning Curve".

As KoshN said, I'm more forgiving. I liked what I saw being set up for the future and I liked the relationships between the characters quite a bit. Sometimes what I see people write about Rangers seems like they suddenly think that the guy who wove the intricate Babylon 5 universe suddenly went stupid. Me, I *definitely* don't think that.

Jan

 

[KoshN]

1) whats this about rangers getting in trouble for wisely leaving a battle? i don't remember any reference to this with Marcus Cole when he chose to leave a battle. it seams like an odd direction to take the seemingly well balanced and wise ranger group.

Yes and no. The Minbari are generally inclined to *never* leave a battle un-won. Remember how Delenn escaped from the Drakh back in "Lines of Communication"? Her ship had gotten away and then she turned back to destroy them.

That's different. She retreated first and THEN went back. That gave her the element of surprise. She did the unexpected. We're talking about the B5LotR Rangers being told they should NEVER retreat for ANY reason. That's just pure stupidity.

I forget the episode but somebody (Franklin, maybe?) also commented on the Minbari never backing down during the E/M war.

"Soul Hunter" and it was about the Minbari to continue to fight despite the loss of blood that would've rendered a human incapable of fighting or surviving.

In Rangers this was greatly exaggerated but then JMS mentioned that we'd have found out that there were considerable issues with the Ranger Council that the crew would have discovered if the show had gone to series.

The trouble is, when a non-comedy starts out with something that is apparently extremely idiotic, it turns some people off, and they tune out.

As KoshN said, I'm more forgiving. I liked what I saw being set up for the future and I liked the relationships between the characters quite a bit. Sometimes what I see people write about Rangers seems like they suddenly think that the guy who wove the intricate Babylon 5 universe suddenly went stupid. Me, I *definitely* don't think that.

Jan

To both B5 newbies and longtime veterans, it can result in a WTF moment when JMS comes up with a Minbari council that looks like the Grey Council but isn't (It's the Ranger Council.) and then has them act in a ridiculous fashion for a military organization.

 

[Jan]

I'm not gonna repeat old conversations, Mac.

Jan

 

[AnlaShokGrey]

I feel bad that this awful TV movie was Andreas' last appearance as G'Kar.

Mac, you and I don't agree on much, but we agree on this (although I might replace the word "awful" with the word "unsatisfactory" or the phrase "lesser in the B5 canon").

 

[KoshN]

I feel bad that this awful TV movie was Andreas' last appearance as G'Kar.

Mac, you and I don't agree on much, but we agree on this (although I might replace the word "awful" with the word "unsatisfactory" or the phrase "lesser in the B5 canon").

Sirois' conniption fit in the weapons interface, her acting in the dojo and her lines everywhere tip it way past awful, for me. <shrug>

ps. Your avatar contains a lot of perspective distortion from you being too close to the lens. It'd be a good idea to take another pic., with the lens 6ft. to 8ft. away, and then enlarge it and crop it to show you the same size as in your current avatar. It's the distance from the lens (actually the distance from the film/sensor plane) that governs how we look in pictures. Anything over 20ft. or so would have the opposite effect, but still wouldn't look right.

 

[AnlaShokGrey]

ps. Your avatar contains a lot of perspective distortion from you being too close to the lens. It'd be a good idea to take another pic., with the lens 6ft. to 8ft. away, and then enlarge it and crop it to show you the same size as in your current avatar. It's the distance from the lens (actually the distance from the film/sensor plane) that governs how we look in pictures. Anything over 20ft. or so would have the opposite effect, but still wouldn't look right.

Well, this was definitely answered by a *guy*, because a girl would know: blurry is your friend. :-D

But seriously, I just snap these pics on just about a weekly basis for Facebook, and they are *always* snaps from my monitor's built-in camera, and they are *always* going to be taken with me sitting in my office desk chair, right in front of the screen. They ain't going to look any better! (Which reminds me, maybe it's time to update my avatar here, since I've updated my Facebook profile pic recently...)

 

[KoshN]

ps. Your avatar contains a lot of perspective distortion from you being too close to the lens. It'd be a good idea to take another pic., with the lens 6ft. to 8ft. away, and then enlarge it and crop it to show you the same size as in your current avatar. It's the distance from the lens (actually the distance from the film/sensor plane) that governs how we look in pictures. Anything over 20ft. or so would have the opposite effect, but still wouldn't look right.

Well, this was definitely answered by a *guy*, because a girl would know: blurry is your friend. :-D

Blurry is not the problem. Perspective distortion is the problem. Blurry has nothing to do with it. That said, a girl's best friend is a Nikon Soft 1 filter (features a very light coating of vacuum deposited silver on an optically flat surface).

But seriously, I just snap these pics on just about a weekly basis for Facebook, and they are *always* snaps from my monitor's built-in camera, and they are *always* going to be taken with me sitting in my office desk chair, right in front of the screen. They ain't going to look any better! (Which reminds me, maybe it's time to update my avatar here, since I've updated my Facebook profile pic recently...)

What I said in my previous post is technically accurate, diplomatic and constructive, and comes from about 35 years of experience with pro. Nikon gear and 4x5. If you want your avatar to be flattering, it's excellent advice. ...and that's all I want to say on the matter.

 

[AnlaShokGrey]

Honestly, I'm a little baffled. I just reread the original comment, and...perspective distortion? Really? What part of me is distorted? That looks pretty much like my face looks. It's not like I have a fish-eye lens on my monitor... Distorted? Really?

 

[KoshN]

Honestly, I'm a little baffled. I just reread the original comment, and...perspective distortion? Really? What part of me is distorted? That looks pretty much like my face looks. It's not like I have a fish-eye lens on my monitor... Distorted? Really?

Since you asked.....

Fisheye lenses introduce lots of barrel distortion, NOT perspective distortion. Your avatar looks like it was shot with something between a moderate wideangle (e.g a 35mm lens on a 35mm camera or a Nikon D3) and a normal lens (e.g a 50mm lens on a 35mm camera or a Nikon D3), both of which are rectilinear lenses (i.e. Straight lines that are not in the center of the frame are recorded as straight.), BUT shot from 2.5ft.~3ft. away.

You could shoot a portrait with a 14mm ultra-wideangle from 6ft. to 8ft. away, enlarge it up to the size you want and it would show no perspective distortion. Naturally, it wouldn't look as good as if the picture was shot with a 85mm or 105mm lens from 6ft. to 8ft. away, because of the grain/pixilation caused by the extra enlarging, but none would show perspective distortion (big nose, with the remaining facial features falling away/dramatically smaller in extreme cases, e.g. 14mm lens shot fron 1.5ft~2ft. away).

 

[AnlaShokGrey]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Mac, but like most of the rest of the internet-using world, I'm just going to continue taking my profile/avatar photos with my built-in monitor camera, for good or for ill. I really don't see a problem with this photo for the purposes for which it's intended (or with the one I'm going to replace it with after posting this).