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

BABYLON 5 Movie Doesn't Get Out of Spacedock After All!!

As good as Crusade and Jeremiah??? by Arch_Stanton	Feb 26th, 2005 08:02:12 PM
That's a low blow, you prick
oh yeah, and... by Arch_Stanton	Feb 26th, 2005 08:02:31 PM
FIRST!
What? You didn't like "Crusade" and "Jeremiah"? by Hercules	Feb 26th, 2005 08:12:49 PM
you don't like two of three series JMS created? You don't sound like a fan of the man's TV work ... should he NOT be allowed to shape "Star Trek" to his specifications?
Since there's no James Bond talkback yet, I'll hijack this one by FrankDrebin	Feb 26th, 2005 08:16:18 PM
If "Casino Royale" is set at the start of Bond's career, does that mean no Judy Dench or John Cleese? And will it be set in the present day? A tricked-out Aston Martin was clever in '64 but not now. You can read the few tidbits available (including about a JB, Jr. series of books) at http://www.mi6.co.uk/ or http://www.commanderbond.net
I can't tell if Herc is being sarcastic or not!! by [STARS]TyranT	Feb 26th, 2005 08:25:06 PM
But come on, Jeremiah I can't speak for - but Crusade was as mediocre as Babylon 5 year 5. Ty^
Crusade and Jeremiah? by BRTick	Feb 26th, 2005 08:30:47 PM
i know crusade was pretty fucked (jms blames the network). but what was wrong with Jeremiah? aside from the fact no one watched it, it was ok.
Jeremiah was okay, at least in its early episodes ... by Hercules	Feb 26th, 2005 08:35:26 PM
But I don't want to see JMS anywhere near Star Trek. He writes the shittiest "humorous" dialog in the 'verse. *** and that Casino Royale tidbit IS interesting, so I gave it its own post.
For the record, my vote for next Trek showrunner is ... by Hercules	Feb 26th, 2005 08:39:13 PM
Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens. And even that choice is trumped by Ron Moore if he's done with "Galactica" at that point.
A B5 movie could make money.... by cornstalkwalker	Feb 26th, 2005 08:45:05 PM
... but you would have to put big name actors in it and have a huge budget for special effects. B5 is a great universe with many possibilities. Sorry if you didn't enjoy Jeremiah. As far Crusade, who knows how that could have turned out.
Man, screw JMS... by kintar0	Feb 26th, 2005 09:00:24 PM
He writes crappy comics and television shows. Babylon 5 doesn't hold a candle to a Farscape helium muppet fart. Seriously, he should be kept far, far from anything Trek. I think that the fact that the Enterprise production staff refused to look at any unsolicited teleplays, that they refused to let anyone from outside their tiny, lame creative circle had serious ramifications and is why Enterprise is/was so crappy. They oughta do a post Voyager series but solicit major genre authors to write all the teleplays for the first season, and use only unsolicited teleplays for the rest of the seasons, with "names" writing the series premieres and finales. You think Harlan Ellison wouldn't write a Trek episode? Or Orson Scott Card? Or Neal Stephenson? Or Stephen King? Or the Wachowskis? Or Chuck Palahniuk? Or Stephen King? Or George Lucas? You wouldn't want to watch a friggin' Joss Whedon episode of Star Trek? I mean, I wouldn't, but aren't there tons of people who would? Give us something cool to watch, you motherfuckers, and we'll fucking watch it.
My God, that is lame. by DoctorWho?	Feb 26th, 2005 09:01:53 PM
Is Hollywood truly out of ANY original ideas? How many talented,writers or unique scripts will be passed over in lieux of this? Babylon 5 is just so hilariously unoriginal and lame. I can see an X-Files movie, hell even Fat Albert seemed an inevitable "gsng rape" by Hollywood sooner or later. But who's the genius who brings up Babylon 5 at the board meeting? This is ia level of geekdom I cannot comprehend. IF YOU LIKE BABYLON 5 YOU ARE LAME...IDENTIFY YOURSELVES NOW!
JMS isn't the guy to author the episodes... by Arch_Stanton	Feb 26th, 2005 09:50:24 PM
... but I'd really like to see him write the series bible for the next Trek outing. His "big picture" visions have been outstanding, although his dialogue tends to be really awful. He would probably make a great show runner, since he managed to make B5 look so damn good on so damn little money. Even Crusade had a great vision behind it.
Next Star Trek Showrunner by Aurelfell	Feb 26th, 2005 10:16:51 PM
I think that Manny Coto has proven him self more than able to oversee Star Trek. While I've nothing but praise for the Reeves-Stevenses, we'd be better of letting Mr. Coto worry about the day to day beaurocracy of the show, ald free the likes Judith, Garfield and others up to concentrating on producing more brilliant teleplays.
I must disagree with my esteemed colleague Spamster. by Noriko Takaya	Feb 26th, 2005 10:41:57 PM
I'm not convinced that a B5 movie is doomed to failure at the box office just because few people had ever heard of it - who ever heard of Star Wars before it first hit the big screen back in the day? Who ever heard of Aliens before the first movie ever came out? What will make or break a Babylon 5 feature film is what makes or breaks all feature films, science fiction or not: good writing, good acting, good directing. It may take a few decades, but hopefully at some point a young, visionary director will get hold of B5 and launch a whole new series of film masterpieces. Or, to follow the pattern set by the Superman and Batman movies, two really great flicks followed by increasing levels of craptacularity. Oh well, that's Hollywood. In the meantime, fuck all y'all JMS-playa hataz out there! I sure hope that if there IS a new Trek series at some point in the future, Straczynski is the man at the helm with FULL CREATIVE CONTROL while Judith & Garfield Reeves-Stevens pen the scripts. Both Federation and the Odyssey series that the Reeves-Stevens ghost-wrote for Shatner were Trek par excellence, and would have been so much better in the theater than the last three ST movies that it is not even funny. There IS a lot of great Trek out there, folks, it's just that it is printed on dead trees. Toppu o Nerae!
Now we get mentioned... by sftv	Feb 26th, 2005 11:01:49 PM
A few extra tidbits since the B5 movie wasn't newsworthy on AICN until it was shuttered... The Movie - It has been in the works for over a year. The unnamed production company is likely Winchester Films (now Content Films), which is the same company that initially was going to fund the Red Dwarf movie. There are rumours that Tom Sizemore was in line to be one of the main characters but his recent attempt to make like a Centauri (who also have more than one) probably didn't help matters. JMS & Trek - Straczynski was actually approached by Paramount to be an Executive Producer on Enterprise for season three, which he turned down. Straczynski and Bryce Zabel (Dark Skies) put together an unsolicited treatment for a new take on Trek that they presented to Paramount. Lee Whiteside SFTV.org Webmaster
JMS by kdoc13	Feb 27th, 2005 12:08:10 AM
Wow, what a horrid idea letting this guy run the Trek universe. I went into all three with an open mind, but none of those shows were any good. I am no die-hard Trek fan by any means, but I do enjoy it. To give him the reigns would be a mistake. B5 had some of the cheapest production values I have ever seen. I got better graphics on Wing Commander 4 for my computer. And none of the characters were that inspiring. If DS9 was his idea, there must have been a lot of re-writing involved. Plus, it has a lot of Ron Moore trademarks in it, so I am not buying that story one bit. Supposed to be a big Trek announcement on Monday. I think they are going to green light another movie. Personally, my choice to guide Trek, Majell Barrett. Let her pick and choose. She knows what her husband would have wanted.
B5 production values by XeRocks81	Feb 27th, 2005 12:22:38 AM
of course they shitty production values, dumbass. They had no money! So considering that, and the state of CGI when they started in hte early 90s. I think it looks great
GIVE TREK TO JMS! How could it be a bad thing? (NT) by warp11	Feb 27th, 2005 01:23:33 AM

You know, I loved B5 for the most part, but... by JackBurton	Feb 27th, 2005 02:26:08 AM
JMS's attitude has always kinda shit me, and I've always found it rather hypocritical for the man who basically, let's say "borrowed", so damn much of his plot for B5 directly from Tolkien's Lord Of The Rings, only put into a sci-fi setting and context, for him to accuse anyone else of idea theft is idiotic and, as I said, just plain hypocritical beyond belief. DS9 and B5 both had similar concepts and the odd similar idea but they ultimately both did their own thing to their own flavour and both did that pretty damn well overall, so JMS's bitching about DS9 over the years reeks of nothing but sour grapes over not getting the Star Trek job that he had chased and been up for himself at one point. **************************** ************************** ************ As for this movie version, I'm not surprised that it fell apart, especially when they started recasting some of the main characters, replacing the original actors, and once again had little intention of using most of the previous cast from Babylon 5 in this new project, which one would think they would have learnt by now isn't what people want to see. What fans really want is the return of the major characters that we got to know and enjoy over the course of B5, and for all those niggly and pointless loose strings from season 5 to be tied up and finally answered (in live action, screw the books and other mediums). We want a movie that slots in between the second last episode and last episode and that can truly wrap all that unresolved crap up and give us a new and enjoyable big screen adventure while doing so. We want the original cast and characters. And what we don't want is yet another cheap cash in spin off attempt that goes nowhere and does nothing. At least that's my opinion and reading of the situation amongst fans anyway.
They never recast any of the B5 regulars. by Hercules	Feb 27th, 2005 03:17:09 AM
There was no REAL casting, because there was no movie, but the movie was going to center mostly on new characters, and Straczynski said old regulars were sought to reprise their TV roles as supporting characters. If Bruce Boxleitner somehow decided he was too big a deal to reprise the role of John Sheridan, John Sheridan would have remained offscreen. The only character they were thinking about recasting was Galen, a character returning from the much-loathed "B5" sequel "Crusade."
hEY HERC, DANCE ON THAT GRAVE WITH A LITTLE MORE ZEAL. by SG7	Feb 27th, 2005 03:41:32 AM
Seriously. Your heart's obviously not in it. **************************** ************************** **** I always thought JMS had neat stories but, with a few exceptions, extremely cheesy and strained dialog. As to the production values: come on! They pioneered CGI and virtual sets for TV while Trek was still using plastic models and cheeseball "cave of the week" sets. And they did it with no cash, which is something a true trek nut should relish considering the production values of TOS which on DVD the full splendor of their plywood is revealed. As to JMS on trek: no. Manny Coto and the curent staff kicks ass.
JMS writing Trek would be wrong ... by Bob X	Feb 27th, 2005 04:27:23 AM
For exactly the same reason Whedon writing Walker, Texas Ranger would be. Also, the secons season of Jeremiah rocked and Crusade would have too, given time. So there!
Well... by JackBurton	Feb 27th, 2005 04:38:32 AM
Actually, according to a few of the past B5 cast members as recently as late last year(including Jerry Doyle and Claudia Christian) they had heard from their fellow cast mates who thought they were going to be in the new film if/when it happens that their services wouldn't actually be required after all, and that just like with Peter Woodward (who played Galen) their roles were likely going to be recast with more marketable names if the film actually came to be. Aparently according to them they were told that the film was planned as basically a reboot, and any links to the show itself would be tennous ones at best. Woodward also confirmed that he had been told that despite the plans to feature Galen quite prominently, he wouldn't be cast in the role, and it would be recast with someone else. **************************** ************************** ************ As for Crusade being "much loathed" that would all be a matter of opinion, and from what I've seen over the years that show is still thought of far more highly than the other attempted spinoffs and tv movies.
Oh, yeah, one more thing... by JackBurton	Feb 27th, 2005 04:41:14 AM
Apparently both Boxleitner and Furlan still would have likely retained their roles, at least from the indications given, but at least some of the other characters would have been recast.
Warners by badboymason	Feb 27th, 2005 04:53:47 AM
If Warners would only make a "big budget" film with "big name" stars, why not cast big names in some beefed up new roles and get the movie made??? It seems fairly straightforward to me. One of these new roles was "Diane Baker", a scientist. Get Ashley Judd, Michelle Pfeiffer, Meg Ryan or someone to play them and you're halfway there..
On one hand, where is the vision of Hollywood these days, and on by TheGinger Twit	Feb 27th, 2005 09:59:58 AM

Herc for your ongoing attacks on JMS... by ComputerGuy68	Feb 27th, 2005 10:02:47 AM
I place a curse on "Serenity" I hope it makes $10 at the BO. Asshole... Oh and Whedon sucks too! One more thing BSG is not that great either and will run out of ideas by season three.
DarkHawke by RenoNevada2000	Feb 27th, 2005 10:27:46 AM
Ya beat me to the punch on clarifying JMS' alleged "attacks" on DS9. In the interviews with him I've seen and when he's discussed it on line, he's always said words to the effect of "Well, I pitched Paramount B5, they passed, a few years later DS9 came out. Your guess is as good as mine." At most one could call that passive agressive, not the active rabid attacks that many DS9 fans characticurize (SP, I know) things as to distract from the fact that after B5 was succeeding and gaining criticak notice due to its ongoing story arcs, DS9 suddenly sprouted ongoing story arcs...
More to be revealed... by RenoNevada2000	Feb 27th, 2005 10:36:07 AM
I'm sure as time goes on, JMS will find himself freer to talk about how certain things went down on this project. As an example I refer you this poast of his from last night, archived over at www.jmsnews.com- http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.asp x?ID=1-17292
Clarification on the B5 Movie Situation... by Leto III	Feb 27th, 2005 12:13:52 PM
First of all (and which I haevn't) seen in here yet), the main problem lay not with WB, but with the "producers" the studio put in charge of the film. Alain Gottesman is not a producer, nor was his partner, Rosen. Gottesman had tried and failed miserably to get one other movie made, and it was the pair who were pushing for recasting the film with "movie stars," not Warners. ******** WB failed insofar as their lack of belief in a potential audience -- despite half a BILLION quid in DVD sales, one of the biggest smashes in Warner Home Video's entire history, whose constituents would've paid back even a mid-range-sized budget domestically within the couple of weeks in release. The problem lay in trusting those two puling mouth-breathers not to wreck the show by foisting their "demands" onto JMS and the team. Alas.
by waelse1	Feb 27th, 2005 03:09:32 PM

Not a fair assessment of Crusade by waelse1	Feb 27th, 2005 03:24:04 PM
Crusade could have been good, it bears a resemblance to year 1 of B5, which sets stuff up for the future but seems lacking in dramatic power compared to what followed. The future scripts that were briefly available online showed that the story was apparently going to change from 'saving earth from a plague' to 'saving the universe from humans', as we were apparently digging too deep into shadow technology. Whether this 'we are bad guys' storyline would have met with popularity after 9/11 I don't know (Ward Churchill would have tuned in), but JMS would have taken us places that you don't normally get on TV. He's a terrific writer, there are (were?) websites full of quotes pulled from B5. I haven't seen anything like that for a TV show before. The freedom JMS had with B5 unfortunately has eluded him ever since. Re: Startrek, it should remain buried for the foreseeable future. No one got excited unfortunately about a TV show that essentially has been on air about 20 years, no matter the quality. Enterprise was pretty good and it's ratings fell and fell.
Shall I put on my "surprised" face? by Bart of Darkness	Feb 27th, 2005 05:16:56 PM
Highly unlikely from day one.
I can't imagine why anyone would be stupid enough to recast any by Hercules	Feb 27th, 2005 05:36:26 PM
My understanding is JMS's script did not focus on any of the original B5 characters. It'd be stupid to recast the Jerry Doyle character, for example, when you'd piss off fewer fans. I know I tolerated not having Spock in the last four "Star Trek" movies far better than I would have tolerated having Spock played by Martin Landau or somebody. All this business about recasting some of the main B5 characters did, does and always will sound like horseshit conjecture to me.
Oh, and since the Reeves-Stevens get A-pluses for characterizati by Hercules	Feb 27th, 2005 05:38:58 PM
I say they be made the next Trek showrunners, and JMS be hired to help them with the plotting. Assuming he's available.
Damn... by SG7	Feb 27th, 2005 07:21:20 PM
...the pure hate some pople spew about TV shows blows me away. It's TV. It's not that important. You pople act as if your life is somehow bound to this shit and that is actually matters. It doesn't. Anytime an artist doesn't get to do thier thing becuase of suits is sad, whether you like the art or not. To cheer and slap each other on the back when someone fails to deliver is just pathetic. When one of you manages to put five years of TV on the tube against all odds with little or no compromise with the suits you might be entitled to pontificate.
So JMS had some misfires. Hell, just about everything Rodenberry by Big Bad Clone	Feb 27th, 2005 07:42:17 PM
Have Gun will Travel and the stuff he wrote before Trek were created by others. The shows and pilots he created just blew ass. Sure they might have raised some good ideas here and there, like Crusade and Jeremiah, but overall they lacked magic. So, if anyone has a shot at bringing back a good Trek, I'd add JMS to the list due to his comic book output (Supreme Power is fucking excellent, Spider-Man, less so) and the good years of B5.
What primarily impresses me about JMS... by SpacePhil	Feb 27th, 2005 07:54:42 PM
What primarily impresses me about JMS is that he really is a professional when it comes to television writing. Say what you will about the man, but he made Babylon 5 a success. And, more to the point, he's done his time in the trenches; served as script editor on a ton of shows, including "Murder She Wrote" and "The Real Ghostbusters." I don't doubt that any series he's put on - including a Trek series - will be a success.
First time Herc's ever pissed me off ... by jgsugden	Feb 27th, 2005 08:24:06 PM
B5 was a major achievement in US sci-fi. It was done on a piss-poor budget, it was the first US sci-fi series with epic storytelling that was designed to span 5 seasons and it managed to stay on budget. Plus, the storys and characters were interesting and innovative, unlike Star Trek's tendency to repeat itself every friggin season. True, Straczynski's dialogue is not as sharp as Whedon, but his vision for a story is the best on tv. If JMS wrote the outlines and handed the dialogue off to some of the Mutant Enemy staff to flesh out, you could be looking at incredible tv, regardless of the premise or setting.
"it managed to stay on budget" by Hercules	Feb 27th, 2005 09:19:04 PM
who cares if the effects looked like shit! they were on budget! tough on fans' eyes, but listen to those accountants cheer!! ****** For the record, I love JMS' Rising Stars and Supreme Power comic books; he obviously has an incredible talent for plotting, and perhaps his dialog sounds a bit less tinny in print. But as far as I'm concerned he can work on Trek as long as he doesn't write its teleplays. There's a looooooooong-ass list of writers I'd put in charge of Trek before that dude.
Let B5 Die. Let ST Rest by nexxus7	Feb 27th, 2005 11:08:24 PM
For the most part I caught this all on the DVDs, so was able to watch everything in sequence. B5 was good for what it was -- a four-year story arc. The 5th year was mediocre at best. Every other spin-off series or TV movie after that had no traction and little success, so why would anyone in their right mind throw money at something that failed to amass an audience when you were giving it to them free. If JMS has such a brilliant concept for a movie, why not take it to one of the networks and have it produced as a TV movie? Why does he need $50 million or whatever this thing would be budgeted for? Fans settled for on-the-cheap effects during the series run, and today's stuff comes pretty close to cinema quality, so it can't be that. Big name actors aren't it. Maybe JMS just wants a big paycheck and to feed his ego. Who knows. But why not just get it out there in some form and move on. As far as ST is concerned, Enterprise's body is still warm and everyone's already talking about the next series. Doesn't anyone understand that people have been trekked to death. But everyone from Shatner to JMS to B&B to Coto keep chiming in with how they can "save the franchise." Doesn't anyone realize WE ARE SICK & TIRED OF THE FRANCHISE! (and I've been a Trek fan since running home after school to watch reruns). It's like all these people are trying to see if there's any more milk they can suck out of the tit. For crying out loud, the tit has become a dried up husk people, let it rest for three years or so before you even think of brining it back. But of course they won't. It's like watching them trot out an arthritic old horse to lose another race.
Dare we hope the next Star Trek series is as good as by Defiant	Feb 28th, 2005 12:00:47 AM
It never amazes me that on these talkbacks, no matter what the subject is, eveyone comes to bash the topic. Still, this site looses credit with me when the people who we hear the news from throw in their own lame jabs. Don't worry about JMS harming Star Trek. Star Trek did it all on it's own. The last two Star Trek films and series did so bad that chances are we will be lucky if we ever see another. Voyager IMO for the most part was a horrible Lost in Space meets Star Trek, and Enterprise for the most part was awful until last year when it took it's Crusade approach (send a main ship out to save earth from inevitable destruction)when it became OK, and now this year it is finally good but too little too late. I don't know what you all saw in Firefly, but I thought it was mediocre at best. I admit that it never had the opportunity to live up to it's potential, but neither did Crusade (which I personally thought had a much better cast of characters with better actors playing them). As far as JMS is concerned, he has his faults, but don't even get me started on Whedon's. Buffy and Angel were extremely uneven as far as quality is concerned. They would both go from being good for months at a time to bad for months at a time. In Buffy's case I thought the entire seasons of 4 and 6 were horrendous.
The FX on B5 sucked? by SG7	Feb 28th, 2005 12:30:17 AM
Since when? I mean, turn back the fucking clock and get a clue. It was BECUASE of B5 that the trek dudes stopped palying wtih their plastic models and got a clue of their own and they still couldn't do it as well. When starfires and destroyers filled the screen and beams were cutting ships in half with the parts floating away and not just blowing up into a match-cut fireball it was fucking cutting edge TV FX work. B5 has it faults but the FX are not one of them.
Don't you people read Amazing Spider-Man? Keep JMS away from ev by Tall_Boy	Feb 28th, 2005 12:56:35 AM
Cheap melodramatic lost baby twists, christ what's wrong with him?
"JMS-run Star Trek series would be like giving him the reigns of by Tall_Boy	Feb 28th, 2005 12:59:18 AM
I fixed Dark Hawke's post for him
Babylon 5's effects were VERY good for the time. by Defiant	Feb 28th, 2005 01:29:35 AM
They didn't have the money that Star Trek did. More was spent on Voyager's pilot than an entire year of any season of Babylon 5. If JMS insisted on a higher budget, he might have not had a show. And the once in a blue moon that DS9 or TNG actually had space footage and the even rarer time there was a space battle, atleast half of it was usually recycled footage from previous episodes or movies, and if their actually was new footage, most of the time it would be reused again later. It may have looked better than B5, but it is not as impressive when you see it again, and again, and again, and again.
Screw Herc and AICN, I'm done by cplhicks	Feb 28th, 2005 08:21:10 AM
Man, I remember when this site presented news in a useful manner, not some opinionated BS. This site used to have news before anyone else. It's been on a huge downhill slide since Herc took over coaxial. I also rememeber when this place was more than just an excuse for a bunch of pathetic flamers to trash anything they don't like. I don't like half the crap people rave about on here, but I don't waste my time ruining it for other people. If you hate it so much, why waste your time? I remember when this site was worth reading. It is not anymore. It has reached bottom, judging by everything I'm reading here. I'm going to take my own advice-- why waste time with something I can't stand? Just had to get that off my chest. 1 less visitor-- permanently.
I'm not surprised by ATARI	Feb 28th, 2005 08:43:02 AM
B5 is over and done -- let it be. Star Trek is dead, too. And the final Star Wars movie comes out in May. Maybe now some of you losers will get a life.
Got crusade box set for me birthday today by zathras34	Feb 28th, 2005 10:28:22 AM
Yup...I must say in this rainy monday in ohio..I received the "Crusade" box set from me parents along with the season 5 of "Angel"..to which now..all of me buffy verse is now on dvd..and my neice now has all my old vhs's of Buffy/Angel.. My point is..with all the Herc JMS beating down that he does..I am reminded of a phrase from galen on crusade... He's asked "you mean there's no one who disagree's with you?.." "Correct, I have no surviving enemies...at all" So Herc dont make me banish you.. LOL...(Its all in fun) We all love what we want..its what makes us all unique.. Peace
>>> HERCULES the WRONG by Jeditemple	Feb 28th, 2005 10:45:41 AM
See, this JMS bashing is just another reason to quit reading this stupid site and head over to comingsoon.net or Cinescape. I'm getting tired of AICN trying to TELL US what to think all of the time.
Was I? by radio1_mike	Feb 28th, 2005 10:52:10 AM
Was I the only guy around who sort-of liked Crusade? I could not stand B5, but Crusade was watchable in that Farscape isn't on this second kind-of-way. Like Jeremiah and Odessey5.
MADE FOR TV MOVIE... NOTHING MORE by bubcus	Feb 28th, 2005 02:21:18 PM
My brother has the boxsets and passionately loves the series. I have enjoyed what I have seen so far. BUT I am a little leary on this push to turn all sci-fi shows into theatrical movies. Babylon 5 belongs on TV, that's where its fanbase adopted it and that's where I feel it should remain. I am curious to see SERENITY which was tragically cut short but again, feel like that should have stayed in the TV realm (based on its premise) and even BATTLESTAR GALACTICA, like FARSCAPE, belongs to TV. It's just the way they're set up... they are meant to be long continuing adventures. STAR TREK got into the movie realm because of STAR WARS and faired well but there has been a particular approach that made it successful "Captain Hornblower in Space." Another upcoming film that make me nervous is the upcoming TRANSFORMERS. Sure, it's like a young boy's wet dream to see giant robots transformed out of cars... but my passion for that series revolves around what it was in the 80's. I don't think they can measure up to that nostalgia. Especially when some of the voice actors that stole the show have since passed away. Anything beyond will be a let down. We recently lost the doctor from B5 and his absence will be felt if any future B5 films are produced. Tears came to my eyes at the beautiful end of B5's 5 year run and I say that THAT is precisely where the series should end. It was satisfactory and beautiful. MOVIES should be one-shots or maybe a sequel or two... B5, BATTLESTAR, etc should stick with TV to bring us dozens to hundreds of continued adventures....
But BSG _was_ originally a theatrical film by Virchow	Feb 28th, 2005 02:55:34 PM
"Battlestar Galactica" was released theatrically before it was ever seen on TV. I remember seeing it at the Park theater in Memphis. It was in "Sensurround," basically just a subwoofer over a monaural track, but very impressive for the time. The sound of Atlantia exploding was especially memorable.
"Who cares if the effects looked like shit?" I didn't. by SpacePhil	Feb 28th, 2005 03:09:58 PM
Yeah, exactly, who cares? One of the things that was fantastic about B5 is its emphasis on storytelling. Voyager looked like gold, but who fucking cared if you didn't give a shit about what was going to happen? JMS took risks. He made the show happen, and eventually the technology caught up with his vision. With Voyager and Enterprise, there wasn't any kind of vision there to begin with. And Herc, I can't help but think you knew you were going to get this kind of a reaction. Trolling on your own boards? That's kind of pathetic, man.
Shaun Cassidy and now Straczynski? by UncleSam	Feb 28th, 2005 03:15:37 PM
I question anyone who equates "genius" with Shaun Cassidy and Straczynski. I'll admit Straczynski is far superior to Cassidy but one word describes all Straczynski shows... cliche. Can anyone write worse dialog? You literally know what the characters are about to say before they say it. I was entertained at the Shadow plotline but that's it! Everything else sucked on B5. I remember the Deep Space Nine/ B5 argument. It might be true but I have to say that Deep Space Nine did a better job on characters and especially the Dominion story-arc which made it one of the best of the Star Trek series.
Yes. Ref: Voyager seasons 3-7 by SpacePhil	Feb 28th, 2005 03:18:14 PM
Enough said.
BSG was on TV before they showed the 2-hour pilot in theaters by The Gipper	Feb 28th, 2005 03:40:48 PM
All they did was take the 2-hour BSG pilot and show it unedited in the theater. It premiered on ABC first. They did something similar with Buck Rogers in the late '70s / early '80s, too, showing the pilot episode in theaters (although that may have actually appeared in the theaters before going to TV.)
More JMS on his new TV series for Fall 2006 -- Star Wars: The Se by The Gipper	Feb 28th, 2005 03:44:15 PM
From JMS: One last aside, on a long term project...a certain known film writer/director was recently asked by a particular studio to do a series using an established character. This person is a big fan of B5 as well as a friend, so a call came to me to ask if I wanted in on this. I said hell yes. I can't say much else about it, because a) it wouldn't be appropriate and b) things can still fall out, though that's doubtful at this stage (negotiations have formally begun with the studio), but if it does go ahead, the plan is to write the whole first season over the course of 2005, shoot in the spring of 2006 for a fall 2006 debut. There are reasons why we'd have to write the whole thing first that will become clear once I can explain what the character is. Again, I dont want folks to get too excited about this, because this is a weird business and this is the one town where hope can kill you, but if it goes ahead as discussed, it could be massively cool.
Herc, plz don't troll :( by XAOS	Feb 28th, 2005 04:11:37 PM
Or else I shall be forced to bludgeon you with Xander's collection of Babylon 5 commemorative plates
Hey SpacePhil! by UncleSam	Feb 28th, 2005 04:26:46 PM
I didn't like Voyager, but Cassidy and Straczynski shows are worse.
Worse than Voyager? by SpacePhil	Feb 28th, 2005 07:55:01 PM
UncleSam, you've got a right to your opinion. But, with all due respect, I don't know if the phrase "worse than Voyager" can possibly be applied to... well... anything.
When comparing those shows... yes, worse than Voyager! by UncleSam	Feb 28th, 2005 09:28:43 PM
All the Star Trek series were under the helm of the same producers, so if you hate 3-7 seasons of Voyager, then you must hate them all becuase it's all basically the same lingo. Frankly, I didn't like more the early seasons of Voyager. I don't even remember the name of the baddies... the hippies with the stringy unwashed hair. The Borg business in the latter seasons made it more interesting at least.
Right on, SpacePhil by Mafu	Mar 1st, 2005 01:53:12 AM
I'm with you on two points: 1) Herc trolling his own board is seriously pathetic, and 2) nothing is worse than Voyager, in my opinion. Babylon 5 may not have been well-financed, but it did set the stage for television FX for years to come. It also ended on its own terms, rather than getting taken off the air in mid-season due to low ratings. No more Babylon 5 movies, no more Star Trek movies, please.
Gee ,Herc slams B5, what a surprise by jtp8000	Mar 1st, 2005 10:59:23 AM
Not everything is set in the "buffyverse" and written by Whedon. Get the stick out of your butt about B5 already. I hope they bring back Buffy written by JMS. Then I might actually watch that piece of dreck.
Bummer by cooper2000	Mar 1st, 2005 12:49:08 PM
They can make a Serentity movie but cant make a B5 movie. They can make crappy Star Trek movies but they cant make a B5 movie. Good ol' Hollywood.
... by SpacePhil	Mar 1st, 2005 09:52:37 PM
... exactly how old are you?

Talkbacks

BABYLON 5 Movie Doesn't Get Out of Spacedock After All!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks