Thirdspace and Ivanova

[hypatia]

I think most people agree in the best of movies/t.v. the brilliance is in a great combo of both. What seems to be in debate here is considering JMS to be someone who carelessly replaced actors and treated them as being somehow beneath his story.

The reverse is much closer to the truth, I think. Only when he had NO choice would he replace an actor with someone playing the same character (such as Anne Sherridan). I've never heard the Alfred Hitchcock style nightmare accounts of actor disdain and disrespect. In fact, most of the actors wanted to work more with him, if anything. Claudia's departure had nothing to do with JMS personally, it was a career move based on her unhappiness (unjustified or justified) of the terms of her contract. She also wasn't replaced, a new character quite unlike her was brought in to fill plot need and character gap.

I don't see at all JMS's work on B5 as him looking down on actors in any way. Did I miss some crucial point somewhere?

 

[Jade Jaguar]

I can see how you might get that impression but I disagree strongly. There's a big difference between being cognizant of potential real-life events that might effect the story and planning for those and considering the actors disposable or interchangeable.

The best evidence I can offer is the fight to keep the original actors when a group optioned a B5 feature film and commissioned JMS to write the screenplay, The Memory of Shadows. The company never did get a deal put together in order to make the film but one aspect became public and that was that they'd hoped for Warner Bros. to distribute the film. WB, only interested in big names and blockbusters wanted to use big name stars rather than the original actors which JMS fought. If he hadn't done so, we might well have gotten a B5 feature film but not recognized any of the characters.

Jan

And further evidence is JMS' refusal to recast G'Kar, or Dr. Franklin, so that their characters remain as dead as the actors who played them. Also he was so saddened by their loss that he couldn't even consider working on anything B5 related, for some time after their deaths.

 

[Cell]

I think most people agree in the best of movies/t.v. the brilliance is in a great combo of both. What seems to be in debate here is considering JMS to be someone who carelessly replaced actors and treated them as being somehow beneath his story.

The reverse is much closer to the truth, I think. Only when he had NO choice would he replace an actor with someone playing the same character (such as Anne Sherridan). I've never heard the Alfred Hitchcock style nightmare accounts of actor disdain and disrespect. In fact, most of the actors wanted to work more with him, if anything. Claudia's departure had nothing to do with JMS personally, it was a career move based on her unhappiness (unjustified or justified) of the terms of her contract. She also wasn't replaced, a new character quite unlike her was brought in to fill plot need and character gap.

I don't see at all JMS's work on B5 as him looking down on actors in any way. Did I miss some crucial point somewhere?

The Claudia incident actually had very little to do with the whole, "JMS isn't too keen on actors" idea as she was leaving the show no matter what. This is based on various interviews I have read with JMS, and the few times I have seen him at a con where he deeply gives off the impression, and even flat out said it at a few cons, that the story is always bigger than the actors and that at the end of the day the actors can be changed and the story wouldn't be any different. I wholeheartedly disagree with that sentiment, because like I said earlier in a visual medium you need good actors to tell the story otherwise the story ends up being meaningless.

Gavor, I can't agree on the story being more important than the actors. Whether it be a drama, comedy, etc. in the end if the actors portraying the parts aren't good then the story doesn't come across the way it should and really doesn't matter as well. The same is true of a bad story with a good actor, no matter how good that actor may be if he is trying to act out crap it will still be crap no matter how good he is. The two best examples of this, and mainly since I saw the movie again the other day, would be Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman from The Prestige. Bale is trying to act his ass off to make a bad story come to life, but in the end the story is bad and not even Bale's acting can hide that. Jackman on the other hand is bad from the get go and because of that no matter how hard I tried I couldn't get past his bad acting to even attempt to get into his story.

 

[Jan]

This is based on various interviews I have read with JMS, and the few times I have seen him at a con where he deeply gives off the impression, and even flat out said it at a few cons, that the story is always bigger than the actors and that at the end of the day the actors can be changed and the story wouldn't be any different. I wholeheartedly disagree with that sentiment, because like I said earlier in a visual medium you need good actors to tell the story otherwise the story ends up being meaningless.

But...the actors can be changed and *have been* changed, and even changed back and the story carried on. There's no arguing with that because we've seen it happen multiple times. That the elements of the story stayed the same doesn't demean the contributions of the actors at all. That's the point that JMS was making - that there were certain things that needed to happen to carry the story to completion regardless of who played the parts. It was those elements that he moved from one character (or actor if you will) to another as need be. In this case, story and character are different parts of the whole.

The best known examples of how the story stayed the same while actors changes is, of course, the telepath arc. JMS needed a Telepath who had enhanced powers in order to fight the Shadows. Originally, Lyta's encounter with the poisoned Kosh would have accomplished this. When Pat Tallman wasn't in the first season, JMS still needed an enhanced teep and so Talia was given a gift as Jason Ironheart left. After Andrea Thompson bowed out, Lyta returned and the enhancement came from her visit to the Vorlon homeworld, The story element, an enhanced telepath, remains the same albeit via a rather tortuous route while the actors, both very skilled, changed.

Continuing the Telepath arc, JMS originally intended for Ivanova to be the one romantically involved with Byron and Lyta only a devoted follower. After Claudia left, JMS simply took the romantic element and moved it to Lyta.

I agree completely that the skill of the actors is crucial but that doesn't make what JMS said incorrect from a writing viewpoint. And that's the viewpoint that JMS is pretty much always speaking from.

Jan

 

[Cell]

But...the actors can be changed and *have been* changed, and even changed back and the story carried on. There's no arguing with that because we've seen it happen multiple times. That the elements of the story stayed the same doesn't demean the contributions of the actors at all. That's the point that JMS was making - that there were certain things that needed to happen to carry the story to completion regardless of who played the parts. It was those elements that he moved from one character (or actor if you will) to another as need be. In this case, story and character are different parts of the whole.

The best known examples of how the story stayed the same while actors changes is, of course, the telepath arc. JMS needed a Telepath who had enhanced powers in order to fight the Shadows. Originally, Lyta's encounter with the poisoned Kosh would have accomplished this. When Pat Tallman wasn't in the first season, JMS still needed an enhanced teep and so Talia was given a gift as Jason Ironheart left. After Andrea Thompson bowed out, Lyta returned and the enhancement came from her visit to the Vorlon homeworld, The story element, an enhanced telepath, remains the same albeit via a rather tortuous route while the actors, both very skilled, changed.

Continuing the Telepath arc, JMS originally intended for Ivanova to be the one romantically involved with Byron and Lyta only a devoted follower. After Claudia left, JMS simply took the romantic element and moved it to Lyta.

I agree completely that the skill of the actors is crucial but that doesn't make what JMS said incorrect from a writing viewpoint. And that's the viewpoint that JMS is pretty much always speaking from.

Jan

And the sloppy way in which the whole Talia departure was handled hurt the story immensely. There were moments very early on that made it clear that there was no implanted personality in Talia at at all and the heavy handed way in which JMS tried to say, "No, it's been her all along, that's the way the story is" made that part of the story fall flat. The only reason the Lyta storyline after Talia's departure was able prosper was because of the completely different direction that it took. On the surface they may seem like the same storyline, but they aren't, and the only tangential connection that they share is the initial Talia departure/Lyta's return. But, that is neither here nor there as far as this discussion is concerned.

From a writing viewpoint doesn't matter in this case since it is a visual medium. In a visual medium both the writing and the acting are part and parcel to the success of the show. That is something that JMS has never really understood. I mean he gives interviews where he espouses the talents of various actors, but then he also makes appearances where he rails on and on about the storytelling process and how that trumps anything the actors can bring to the table. JMS is completely incorrect in what he said for the visual medium. If he were making statements about the story being all and character changes not affecting it in a simple written medium then he would be correct, but in the visual medium he couldn't be more wrong.

 

[Garovorkin]

So cell does this mean you don't think Lorenzo Lamas could have made a great captian Sheridan? Hey if I had my way I would have Cast Steven Segal as Garabaldi, and to play Ivonova The tallented Tanya Roberts. and Have Shelly Hack in the Role of Delenne , Mr T in the role of Dr Franklin and Hulk Hogan as GKar. in the role of Londo Jon Claud van Damm as Lannier the perfect choice Paully Shore. I hope you realize Im kidding.

On a serious note I do see your point about the actors, Good actors do make a difference. But still try imaging B5 with the People I cast, Hurts to think about it doesn't it?

 

[Jan]

On the surface they may seem like the same storyline, but they aren't, and the only tangential connection that they share is the initial Talia departure/Lyta's return. But, that is neither here nor there as far as this discussion is concerned.

You're changing the terminology. Nobody here ever said anything about the same storyline. Same story elements. There's a difference.

From a writing viewpoint doesn't matter in this case since it is a visual medium. In a visual medium both the writing and the acting are part and parcel to the success of the show. That is something that JMS has never really understood. I mean he gives interviews where he espouses the talents of various actors, but then he also makes appearances where he rails on and on about the storytelling process and how that trumps anything the actors can bring to the table.

Tell me exactly which appearance(s) you're referring to. There's a good possibility I have it recorded and can check your claim and the context. I've been to *many* of his appearances and have never once heard him say anything remotely like that.

JMS is completely incorrect in what he said for the visual medium. If he were making statements about the story being all and character changes not affecting it in a simple written medium then he would be correct, but in the visual medium he couldn't be more wrong.

Again, you miss the point and change the terminology. Address the points I made rather than repeating your stance over and over or there's no conversation, only a rote parroting of what you want people to think.

Jan

 

[Cell]

So cell does this mean you don't think Lorenzo Lamas could have made a great captian Sheridan? Hey if I had my way I would have Cast Steven Segal as Garabaldi, and to play Ivonova The tallented Tanya Roberts. and Have Shelly Hack in the Role of Delenne , Mr T in the role of Dr Franklin and Hulk Hogan as GKar. in the role of Londo Jon Claud van Damm as Lannier the perfect choice Paully Shore. I hope you realize Im kidding.

On a serious note I do see your point about the actors, Good actors do make a difference. But still try imaging B5 with the People I cast, Hurts to think about it doesn't it?

I know you're kidding, but that's mainly my point. Sometimes it doesn't even have to be bad actors though, some good actors just aren't meant to play certain roles. I consider Tom Hanks to be the best actor I've ever seen, but I didn't buy him as the doctor in The Davinci Code and that made it impossible for that story to resonate with me at all.

You're changing the terminology. Nobody here ever said anything about the same storyline. Same story elements. There's a difference.

No, there isn't any difference or changing of terminology. Your points pertained to the written medium, not the visual medium that JMS actually was involved in with B5. If you want to make relevant points in regard to my issues with JMS that pertain to the visual medium then go ahead, but so far you have done nothing to actually address the issue.

Tell me exactly which appearance(s) you're referring to. There's a good possibility I have it recorded and can check your claim and the context. I've been to *many* of his appearances and have never once heard him say anything remotely like that.

It was at a few different WizardWorld's and Motor City Comic Cons', but I don't keep track of the cons I go to or record any of the sessions I go to because that's not my thing.

Again, you miss the point and change the terminology. Address the points I made rather than repeating your stance over and over or there's no conversation, only a rote parroting of what you want people to think.

Like I said above, make an actual point that addresses JMS' comments as it pertains to the visual medium and I would be happy to respond to what you have said. However responding about the written medium when that is not the issue at hand does nothing at all to further the topic or discussion at hand and doesn't warrant a response on the non-subject from me.

 

[Jan]

"If it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage."

End of discussion.

Jan

 

[Cell]

Yes, end of discussion in the sense that you have no argument whatsoever, but that's fine.

 

[Garovorkin]

Cell these about JMS are news to me, He seems like a genuinely nice guy on the times ive seen or read interviews of him. I do recall an interview with Shari Belfonte, she was talking about Thirdspace and she made a suggestion about rewriting part of scene because she had a better way to do it, JMS actually listened to her, now she is writer as well as an actress, that may have been factor .

I do tend to be biased in the writers favor. to me the writer tends to be king. More so then the movie director and the actors and especially more so then the Movie executive who in my opinion they are the least important element in the creative process. unfortunately they have have the final say on what gets made and what doesn't.

 

[Cell]

I'm not saying JMS is a bad guy at all, he's never come across that way to me. He has come across as conceited and full of himself, but everyone in Hollywood is that way so he's no different than anyone else. I just don't agree with his views on the role actors take in the storytelling process, that doesn't mean I'm judging him as a person.

 

[Garovorkin]

Hey no problem. say any idea when the next lost B5 lost tales movie is coming out? or is it?

 

[Jade Jaguar]

The same is true of a bad story with a good actor, no matter how good that actor may be if he is trying to act out crap it will still be crap no matter how good he is. The two best examples of this, and mainly since I saw the movie again the other day, would be Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman from The Prestige. Bale is trying to act his ass off to make a bad story come to life, but in the end the story is bad and not even Bale's acting can hide that. Jackman on the other hand is bad from the get go and because of that no matter how hard I tried I couldn't get past his bad acting to even attempt to get into his story.

I liked The Prestige quite a bit. It had a lot of clever ideas, was fairly well written, and well acted. That said, it was no Memento, but that was a truly extraordinary film. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. But, given its 8.4/10 score on the IMDb, it would seem more people agree with me.

"If it ain't on the page, it ain't on the stage."

Jan

Amen. Without a good story/script, actors, no matter how good, are useless.

 

[Cell]

Hey no problem. say any idea when the next lost B5 lost tales movie is coming out? or is it?

No idea yet. It made a pretty good profit, but with the way Hollywood works who knows if we'll ever see a second one.

I liked The Prestige quite a bit. It had a lot of clever ideas, was fairly well written, and well acted. That said, it was no Memento, but that was a truly extraordinary film. You are of course, entitled to your opinion. But, given its 8.4/10 score on the IMDb, it would seem more people agree with me.

Pretty much, it wasn't my cup of tea, but if you liked it then that's cool.

Amen. Without a good story/script, actors, no matter how good, are useless.

That's what I've been saying, except that it works both ways. Good storytelling needs good actors and good actors need good storytelling, it's all on symbiotic process.

 

[Jade Jaguar]

But it's the script that comes first, it is the foundation everything is built on. Second comes the director. A really good director can sometimes get acceptable performances out of marginal actors. A bad director can ruin a script, and waste the actors. Third comes the actors. ALL are important to the finished product, and any can ruin the work. But, that is their hierarchy of importance to the finished work. Now, I will duck, while the editors throw bricks at me...

 

[Jan]

Now, I will duck, while the editors throw bricks at me...

That's an interesting point and I have to say that I came away with a real appreciation of the editing of B5 after working on the "Joe Cuts". There's no doubt in my mind at all that the editing, especially of the 'wham' episodes, made them more than the sum of the writing, acting and directing.

Jan

 

[Jade Jaguar]

Editing will make, or break, a film. A good editor can make cans of trash less trashy, and give cans of art the impact they deserve. They can, and do, determine the character of the film.

 

[hypatia]

Sorry, but what are the 'wham' episodes?

 

[KoshFan]

Coming of Shadows, Severed Dreams, Into the Fire... the big shockers. That's what JMS always called them.