Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Captain Christopher Pike tells all about the new BABYLON 5 TV MOVIE!!!

OMFG... by SG7	Oct 16th, 2001 05:12:29 AM
Based on the trailer alone I knew this would bite. I still hold out hope that it does not bite, but this review leaves little to hope for. I mean, it just sounds STUPID. With crusade at least there was a spark of neatness beneath the TNT mandated stupidity and after reading the unshot scripts I know there was good stuff comming. Maybe JMSs just doing too much? A gazillion comics, the show for Showtime and what not. He probably spent like half a day on this. And when JMS does a script in a day you know it'll suck, becuase all the ones where he posted "I wrote this in one night" have been complete dreck. Doesn't he have anyone on staff with the nads to tell him "Joe, thet sucks ass."?
what part of "better than Crusade" didn't you understand? by Stevie B	Oct 16th, 2001 05:38:01 AM
SG7, what part of "better than Crusade" didn't you understand? Oh well, I guess Talkbacks will always be filled with people quick to condemn something they've never seen.
What is context of "Better than Crusade"? by TemporalFlux	Oct 16th, 2001 06:53:51 AM
I mean, some people may say cyanide is better than eating radioactive Cheerios. Both will surely kill you...its just that one is slightly less painful and works more quickly. Going by the total of the review, I don't see how this movie could be much better than Crusade if at all. Sounds like the guy is splitting a very small hair with that statement.
JMS's Weakness has always been... by Physicist	Oct 16th, 2001 08:19:43 AM
...that he works without a net: no staff writers or story editors to point out the weak scripts, the flawed plotlines, the bad dialogue or the poorly developed characters.
B5's strength was never the FX!! by Drath	Oct 16th, 2001 10:56:08 AM
The story was what made B5 a great show. The FX were at best pretty eye candy that helped move the plot forward, but never great. They didn't need to be! If this new show is making the FX the star, then it's a tremendous mistake. Fortunately there's hope for us fans since this review's emphasis on the tacky FX may not be the the show's vice but a preoccupation of the reviewer. I hope no one tries blaming his being an obvious Trek fan for the bad review though. I'M a Trek fan, but I love Babylon 5 and all the Trek fans I know at the very least enjoyed B5(if not the Trek haters associated with it). My only complaint with the show was that JMS wrapped up his story too quickly. All the important stuff was finished when the fourth season ended(partly because it was being cancelled). But the fifth season was an epilogue more than a real entry into the series. He could have focused on the much lamented GREAT TELEPATH WAR, or taken us through Londo's descent as the Centauri Emperor, but instead the season was mostly about an annoying Telepath guy who couldn't die fast enough. He should have abandoned the 5 year plan and expanded the idea to at least two or three more seasons. I know JMS says he'll return to form with this tentative new show, but don't think he'll ever recapture what worked about the second, third, and fourth seasons again.
He's Doing too much by SithMirth	Oct 16th, 2001 11:09:35 AM
I'm not suprised that this was a bad review, but I'm still devastated. I think the bottom line is that JMS is simply spreading himself too thin. Two comic book series, this show, what the hell ever happened to City of Dreams, and now, Hey! can someone tell me obout this show on Showtime? I thought he had ditched that one.... Gimme details. Anyway, I'm so enamoured with the original series that I'm going to give it a shot. I had a bad feeling, frankly, when I saw the advertisement, and an ever worse one when the show kept apparently getting delayed. We shall see. I still believe in JMS's abilities, but dude's gotta stop speading to the four corners of the Earth (or universe, as it were).
People still don't get B5... by iontyre	Oct 16th, 2001 11:10:04 AM
I never cared a darn for the FX, or the specific talent of the actors, or even the nitpicking of the scripts. What made B5 my favorite hour of the week was release from our tightwad little world that has forgotten how to love the adventure of space. No other Sci-Fi space show (until maybe Farscape came along) since ST-TOS has had that fun adventure feel to it. Nothing in this review leads me to believe B5-LOTR will be any different from previous B5 efforts. I can't wait!
Pilots are usually bad by ryoga	Oct 16th, 2001 11:14:30 AM
Anyone remember B5's pilot, the gathering? It wasn't that great. Star Trek: TNG's pilot, encounter at farpoint? Blah. Deep Space Nine sucked until season three or so... The point is all three shows (B5, TNG, DS9) got very very cool later on in life. Crusade might've gotten that cool if it had gotten past that first 'awkward' season. I'm willing to give any new B5 show the chance I gave the first one... impress me by the second season. Please.
"Give it time!" (big raspberry) by InfraMan	Oct 16th, 2001 11:50:16 AM
JMS has been firmly entrenched as absolute god of the B5 universe for, what, eight or nine years now? I don't really see why so many people say he deserves such a long time ("give it a season or two!") to launch a series set in the same universe. These series aren't all that different from one another. This kind of storytelling should seem old hat to him by now. Many people are clamoring for Berman and his lapdog to be ejected from Trek 'cause they can't seem to get a decent show going. Why does JMS deserve different consideration? If the "creators" of these shows can no longer thrive in the universe they've lived in for so long, then they should be removed from the playing field, or at least put into a penalty box. Not as a punitive action, but for the overall health of these franchises. If Legend of the Rangers or Enterprise were really cutting-edge, amazingly daring kindsa shows, then "Give it time!" would hold some meaning. But they are not really cutting edge and startlingly different than what we've seen in the past few years, or the few years before that (which in itself should be an indicator of creative bankruptcy). Therefore, there's no excuse for not getting it right as soon as these things clear the gates. The only explanation is that the people driving these shows just aren't very good drivers anymore. Sure, B5 & TNG did take a while to get going, but that's because they were brand new kinds of shows filled with brand new considerations and issues. We should expect such shows to take a while to find there footing. But spin-off after spin-off? With so much history to build off of, these shows not being better (faster) is really kind of pathetic. Analogies Ahoy! InfraMan
Lots of shows aren't that great for the first season by Geekgrrl	Oct 16th, 2001 12:33:21 PM
Including B5. I saw the pilot and thought it was a total pile of crap. What was this Napoleon looking dude doing running around and these obvious cgi effects. The characters seemed 2-D and the dialog was horrible. Well, after I tuned back in the next year or year after, I really liked the show. I went back and watched the season one eps and it enhanced the story. It made me wish I hadn't tuned out so early on. Crusade could have been really good, if it had been given more than one summer to air and actually was broadcast in the propper order. I'm willing to give this new one a chance. I think JMS's strength has always been in the long story arcs, and you just can't get that from one tv-movie. And since the Sci-Fi channel only has two original series worth watching right now, then I'm hoping they do pick this up as a series. It sure will beat "Black Scorpion."
Legend of the Rangers by swavill	Oct 16th, 2001 01:48:34 PM
I do want to see this despite the bad reviews . B5 was one of the best SCI FI shows ever made and I would like to see this picked up as a new series. As for giving it time. If I like the premise of a series at all I will always give it a season and a half. It takes about that long for the actors to feel their way into the characters. Once the actors and the writers are comfortable the quality usually improves. My biggest problem with Star Trek : Voyager was that it was as good as it was going to get by the second episode. No one on the show ever seemed comfortable with what they were doing. Crusade just didnt have enough time. Hopefully they will give this a chance. There is just not enough SCI FI on television. SWAVILL LORD of CHAOS
Physicist: "no net"? by jeffv	Oct 16th, 2001 02:36:47 PM
Actually, I thought Harlan Ellison's job as Creative Consultant -- or whatever his title was -- was to watchdog JMS's writing? Not saying anything about the quality of B5:LOTR. Just saying that, technically, he has a net, doesn't he?
LOTR and DS9 by Dargo	Oct 16th, 2001 08:52:21 PM
Interesting that the acronym spells LOTR...I've always seen a sort of parallel between B5 and the LOTR, i.e., the Rangers, the First Ones (i.e., the Valinor), Sheridan returning from the dead after a great fall (Gandalf)... The ideological battle/Cold war between the Shadows and the Vorlons was a unique twist, though. I enjoyed the show, but I never thought the writing was exceptional. There were brief moments of true inspiration, and I though the characters of Londo and G'Kar were interesting and exceptionally well played, but on the whole I think it was a bit overrated. It's primary contribution, I thought, was introducing the concept of a series-long story arc, which is something that was badly needed in sci/fi TV series. I realize I'll get hammered for this, but I thought DS9 had better acting and writing most of the time, even if it was in concept somewhat ripped off from B5. I actually thought it was the best of the Trek series to date...
Huge B5 fan!!! ...but VR superman? shit. by jondoejjj	Oct 17th, 2001 03:57:36 AM
'nuff said. This idea sounds retardid. B5 space combat was at a point where it couldn't get much better..."if it ain't broke, don't fix it"
B5 RULED!! AHHHH! by RipReaver	Oct 17th, 2001 05:33:35 AM
b5 ranked with earth final conflict! haha... b5 got WORSE with each season, haha! ds9 had better acting and writing! haha, ah!!! AH, the opinions on the giant heap of garbage that is the world of message boards. b5 was so much deeper and better written then all that crap its silly actually. it hit ya in the soul, that b5 show, a cry of integrity screaming through a sea of bleak mediocrity, underminded in reputation by the legions of sci-fi fans who had a show right under their noses that fulfilled all the shortcomings of other franchises, but failed to realize this as their impatience and demands for immediate gratification led them astray from the glowing light of a novel-like epic that led the viewer through a journey of emotion, a struggle of universal proportion, and a promise that the central characters would grow, change dramatically, and even die in their efforts against destiny. But alas, foolish voyager lovers, you have failed, and you deserve to peruse these boards defending the absolute garbage of berman era star drek and cartoonish sci-fi episodes of the other "shows". Yes, all of you, pick everything apart, even the things you love on these "message boards," and forever be dissatisifed. B5 F$#@ING RULED!!!!!!!! YES, there were things wrong, but to nitpick and complaion and whine when the greater good of the show shines through, instead of debating, i will say, I LOVED B5, AND IT F#!@ING RULED!!!! AAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!
Grain of Salt by Entil`Zha	Oct 17th, 2001 08:27:27 AM
You have to take this review with a Grain of Salt, I mean look at the reviewer's name, He's obviously a Trekkie, and most Trekkies have never liked B5. Y'all should do what i do, Ignore idiotic reviewers and make up your own mind, watch the show, If it bites, or if you don't like it, THEN bitch and moan about it, But just remember, there are prolly hundred's of movies that you didnt' like, but were actually good movies. or well liked by others. Everybody's got an opinion, make up your own mind
B5 and trek by Integra	Oct 17th, 2001 08:34:48 AM
Trek is really crap compared to B5. I dearly hope this is better then trek. Trek has lost all its life. Ever since it become a big corportate franchise all the plotlines are the same rehashed 'safe' stories. B5 turned all that on its ear. When watching b5 seasons 2 thru 4 i felt like i was watching a true sci-fi book epic played out on tv. Anyone who critizes the show for the 'effects' is a lost cause anyhow, they may as well go watch id4, godzilla, and armageddon. I dont watch for the effects, do you? Anyhow i think crusade showed some signs of developing into a good show. All shows start off shaky, i expect this. The problem with trek is it never got better. For the idiot above that said that JMS writes without a net, really get a clue, he had several staff writers and even wrote a 'bible' for writers to follow when writing episodes for b5. Not to mention Harlan Ellisons consulting involvement. But i wouldnt expect most talkbackers to even know who he is.
Re: Grain of Salt by InfraMan	Oct 17th, 2001 09:18:51 AM
Entil'Zah wrote: "You have to take this review with a Grain of Salt, I mean look at the reviewer's name, He's obviously a Trekkie, and most Trekkies have never liked B5." INFRAMAN SAYS: This coming from someone with your screen name . You also have to take into account the fact that Captain Pike seemed to know a great deal about Babylon 5, and generally spoke of it with respect (except for a much-deserved Crusade bitchslap. InfraMan - with his Pentium-driven, neural-integrated biocircuitry - believes Crusade was the Manimal, Automan, or Misfits of Science of the last decade. It was an embarassment to Babylon 5, and to SF TV in general. But, at least these shows did not have Crusade's pretensions.) And, in case you didn't notice, Pike knocked around Trek a bit as well. Not too lopsided. The Devil's in the Details!-InfraMan
Reaction to this review at b5lr.com by Tosk	Oct 17th, 2001 01:37:32 PM
This review has generated a tidal wave of reactions at the BBS at b5lr.com: http://www.b5lr.com/ubbcgi/Ult imate.cgi Most folks there have slammed the review. Check it out if you're interested. Most of the Rangers cast posts there occasionally, and both Dylan Neal and Warren Takeuchi have posted responses to the review. Check out the thread titled "New Review at Aint It Cool News" and others with similar titles.
Everyone always says Crusade sucked. by raindog2	Oct 17th, 2001 03:22:44 PM
Crusade didn't suck. TNT sucked. Take out the two stand-alone episodes made at TNT's behest (War Zone, and Appearances and Other Deceits which could have been a Voyager episode) and the two episodes with Unibrow Babe in the A-plot (Ruling from the Tomb, Rules of the Game) and the remaining 9 episodes easily beat most of B5's first season, not to mention season five. Add the two unproduced scripts and I think it already makes for a more compelling story than the first season and a half of B5. Sure the music's a little funny and the acting is still a little spotty, but there are a few classic arc-worthy B5 episodes here (e.g. The Well of Forever which in my book blows away B5's first season standout episode Sky Full Of Stars, and Joe didn't even write it) and some characters who promised immense depth almost from the first episode (Galen, Gideon, Nafeel). And FX? Yeah, I guess there must have been FX onscreen at some point too. As long as they don't detract from the story, I don't really notice them. In comparison to what's come before it, the trailer for Rangers makes it feel like Andromeda with G'Kar playing that carnivorous priest guy -- but with the added "uh, yeah, there's this like new super enemy who you never heard of in the shows we've already done further in the future" page out of Enterprise's bible. Uh oh. I'm sure it'll turn out to be something completely different than what I was expecting - Joe's done it before on and off screen, and I think that's just his schtick. But Crusade at least already had a series commitment when its 'pilot', A Call To Arms, was produced. And its creator wasn't doing five other TV, film and print projects at the same time then. Rangers is going to have to fight a lot harder to get picked up. Finally, I see some irony in having someone who admits to liking ST:TOS -- enough to use the name of the captain from its pilot episode -- review something in the B5 universe. I don't seriously believe you can genuinely like them both. But, even though we know Harry's posse is made up entirely of Trekkies, we asked them in recent talkbacks to give us more B5 stuff! It just goes to show that you should be careful of what you wish for.
Um... by MrgnPhnx	Oct 17th, 2001 08:18:44 PM
Might it not be that SciFi is playing the smart card here and not announcing if they're picking the series up until they get, oh, I don't know, RATINGS on the TVM?
Sheesh... by SG7	Oct 18th, 2001 03:30:31 AM
Ya know, I liked B5 and, for the most part, Crusade. And even if the review says this is better than Crusade was, the silly elements noted in the review turn me off big time. Particularly the VR combat gunk. As to the FX : B5s FX were great. Great enough that Paramount hired away Foundation Imaging to do work on Voyager. Good enough for assloads of awards. We've yet to see grand FX shots and space battles on the scale shown on B5 or with the deftness of execution. But as a previous poster noted FX do not make a story, they help advance it and B5 had a great story and if the un shot scripts for Crusade are any indication so did that show, but thanks to the 'tards at TNT we'll never see it. And one more thing : the talk back BBS system bites. Get with the program guys and get a real forums engine.
B5 vs. Trek by ComputerGuy68	Oct 18th, 2001 02:09:01 PM
I was a big Trek fan for over 30 years, and when I first heard about DS9 and B5, which at the time seemed to have a similar premise, I snickered,
Did anyone understand Jay and Silent Bob??? by jtp8000	Oct 18th, 2001 02:51:49 PM
The whole point of the movie is a bunch of dweebs complaining about something they haven't even seen yet. Seen it here, seen it on the Enterprise talkback before it aired. Why don't you schmucks wait until it airs before complaining about it?
Slide down quality lane by DMS01	Oct 18th, 2001 04:45:07 PM
I have huge respect for JMS. I love his stories he wrote for Babylon 5. Durning the 2-4 seasons of B5 that he was under HUGE stress to write most of the series, which made those seasons so great and wanted him to end it at season 4, and not weak ending of 5. Fifth season was splendid, but quiet and empty with filler first year of the alliance thing and then good stuff at the end. However, it wasn't his fault completely that Crusade went down the tubes. However, i think those years of stress may have taken a toll on him. He doesn't have the resources he used too. Scifi isn't greatest places to get money make good high end scifi. Farscape was fluke and has excellent writing to make it work, thou you don't see many episodes come out of Australia. I do hope he gets help for this Ranger series of his, IF he can make it work. I think them putting it off till January is sign of it being ...bad. I won't shoot it down until i see it. However even the pilot for B5 didn't have strong CGI, but its STORY was thing that it set it apart from new-born DS9. I don't think B5: Rangers will have that same momentum. I can only hope he don't do anything stupid.
From JMS on Usenet by Severnorn	Oct 18th, 2001 10:26:51 PM
Let's see...a reviewer who goes under the handle Captain Christopher Pike (a classic Star Trek character), compares everything in B5 to Star Trek, and is subbing for another so-called reviewer called Herc who is a bigtime B5 hater from way back...AND he posts a negative "review" of B5: Rangers? I'm shocked...shocked, I tell you. Lemme give you a heads-up here...there is a qualitative difference between an actual reviewer and the kind of jumped up fanboy who posts a message on this kind of system specifically for the purpose of trashing something out of the usual fanboy feud shit we've seen over the last seven years. (And then, from what I've heard, pops on over to b5lr.com to get reactions because he wants to get his jollies.) This is not a review. It's not even close to a review, and this kind of crap is what totally destroys and has destroyed any hope of legitimacy that aicn has, which is why just about everybody in the business now totally writes them off. It started off as a news site, now it's a fanboy site with clearly distinguished biases. They don't like that I say this? Tough. It's my review of their performance. 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. So for some cretin as this to come out and try to torpedo something out of the same crap feud that's been out there for seven years, and for people like you to actually fall for this crap and post things like.... >If this telefilm tanks, I'd honestly be open to the idea of someone else >taking over the universe from Joe. ...demonstrates a degree of credulity bordering on the mind-boggling. This happens every time we do anything B5 related, it happened every season of the show ("We've seen scripts for season three and it's going to be just action, no more character stuff") and you'd think sooner or later people would learn not to fall for the okeydoke especially when a piece like this is SO obviously a plant by someone with an anti-B5 bias (a prior aicn review that slipped in, from someone WITHOUT any B5 bias, LOVED the film and this was before the EFX were even in the damned thing). Jesus, Jonathan, get a grip and use a little critical thinking once in a while.... jms
How well did the comet tell the tale? by SutureSelf	Oct 19th, 2001 01:55:48 AM

Believability of Capt. Pike by Captain Average	Oct 21st, 2001 02:15:59 AM
Since the other Captain has a rep for being wholly biased against the B5 franchise (which has been called a work of genius by actual, respected critics in virtually every medium - from Matt Roush at TVguide, to critics from the New York Times and L.A. Times, to Time Magazine, and virtually every SF-related publication on the planet)why would you even print this bilge? It's poorly written, biased pieces of garbage like this, that have been steadily reducing AICN from the status of an actual news/reviews site, to a home for frothing-at-the-mouth fanboys. Pity. You guys used to be credible.
St. Buggering.... by samuelk	Oct 21st, 2001 04:07:37 PM
There's a lot more to JMS' resum
JMS Always starts off slow. by Defiant	Oct 22nd, 2001 04:17:12 PM
I actually liked Crusade and would honestly have rather had them continue it instead of making this show. I hope JMS makes some made for TV movies to finsih some of the main plotlines of Crusade. Anyways I think people were Way too ready to jump the gun on Crusade. I liked the first 13 eps of Crusade Much more than the first 13 B5 eps (which I think all pretty much sucked). Even season 3 of B5 got off to a slow start. That's how JMS writes. He starts slow and usually more than makes up for it. I am still very much looking forward to this series.
Gee, should I believe JMS or a disgrunted trekkie who's neve by KidfromBrooklyn	Oct 22nd, 2001 07:46:45 PM
JMS is the genius who created and wrote practically every episode of B5. Why do I (or anyone) care that one non-fan of B5 saw the "Rangers" movie and didn't like it??? I know people who don't like "Buffy" -- that doesn't mean I don't watch it, or that it isn't the best show on TV. Everything I've heard about the "Rangers" movie makes me want to see it. Same goes for "Jeremiah" -- the post-apocalyptic TV series JMS created for Showtime. Both projects sound f***ing great!
Babeltrek by Paul Allen Voiq	Oct 23rd, 2001 06:26:15 AM
First I would like to say I like B5 and DS9 So you dorks fighting over which old tv program is better need to get over it. Both shows are done and people are moving on. Anyone who watched the shows knows that they were playing off 2 dif rays in the spectrum. B5 was more old school Sci-fi about Political systems and Longterm conflicts and shit like that,DS9 was more about personal stories and personal Development. I liked them both for very dif reasons. I also would like to see the rest of B5 and the fate of The Psycorps but Ii don't see this making a great feature film. Its very telling that JMS Does not have but one original cast member in the new show. At least with old cast members they can play with the actors see if they have grown. I could care less about the rangers myself.Whoever compared Earth Final Conflict to B5 is a Fool.
Babylon 5 TV movie by Bretty	Oct 24th, 2001 10:24:22 AM
My first ever posting, born out of frustration at some of the comments on Corporal Pike's review of the new movie. JMS, if he is daft enough to read this stuff, must despair of the intelligence of his potential audience. All this debate about something we have not seen!? And then to slag off JMS as well? Let's face it, JMS is an enormous talent stretching through TV, books and comics. You may, or may not like his stuff but don't mistake your taste with his talent. The new movie may be great or it may be utter crap (I hope not) but I intend to reserve my judgement until I have seen the bloody thing and my opinion will be based on my personal view, not the acidic comments of someone I have never heard of. Have we all not got some better to do? We could be producing something of worth ourselves rather then picking holes in someone elses hard work.

Talkbacks

Captain Christopher Pike tells all about the new BABYLON 5 TV MOVIE!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks