lurkers-guide/ftp/CompuServe/cs94-09-02

STAR TREK: BUJOLD TOO BOLDLY GOES! #818975
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:26

     I was lucky to have a *number* of very fine, talented actors when I
was working on THE TWILIGHT ZONE.  Bruce Weitz, Eddie Albert, Janet Leigh
and others.  The thing about TZ and other anthology shows is that it lets
you do the kind of writing you really can't do on regular series, because
there isn't time, you're rushing from one complication to another, whereas
a show like TZ is built around one central element, and what matters is
how that one element affects the characters.  It gives you the luxury of
*time*.

     (And the episode you cite, "Rendezvous in a Dark Place," is one of
my favorites as well, up with the Albert and Weitz episodes.)

     In the first season of B5, we worked hard to keep the pace as fast
as possible, to really crank the story, establish the universe, and jump
start this puppy.  Now that that's done, I'm working now to apply a
somewhat Zone- ish approach, in that we're carving out time now for more
personal stuff, to see how the stories affect our characters.  If I can
blend these two approaches, I'll be a happy man.

                                                                       jms
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 6:38:24 #820032

     "...there is going to be a Star Trek store someday."

     Too late.  There's already a Star Trek store on the Universal Studios
tour, and in other amusement/tour locations, and the Creation/Sci-Fi
Universe stores, despite carrying a small number of items from other shows,
are primarily ST stores, and they're spreading.

                                                                       jms
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 1:34:01 #820574

     I once asked David Gerrold how many Trek movies would finally be made,
when all was said and done.  "One too many," he said.

                                                                       jms
STAR TREK: VOYAGER CAPTAIN QUITS! #820931
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 2:50:25

     "Stephanie Beacham is off VOYAGER because she didn't want to move
with the production to Florida."

     Huh?  Last I heard, SeaQuest was moving to Florida, not Voyager.

                                                                  jms
STAR TREK: BUJOLD WALKS--RUMOR? #818977
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:22

     We shoot an episode of B5 in 7 days.  Then the director gets 3 days
to make his cut (he's been doing so all along with the editor as film
comes in, but that's the final period where he or she has to finish).
Then John Copeland and I go in and re-edit the director's cut (to small
or major degrees) to make the producer's cut.  Another three days.  So
two weeks so far.

     We then do an edit-master of the episode (done on film, as opposed to
the edit, done on computer-image Avids), which arrives in about 5-7 days.
So three weeks.  We're also waiting for any rotoscope work that needs to
be done on the show (PPG blasts, other non-space stuff, like the
thought-wall in "Mind War"), and for any compositing work (live + CGI),
which can take up to a few more days to a few weeks.  Split the difference
and say two weeks. So now we're up to five weeks.

     Midway through this process, we meet with Chris Franke and the
sound people to spot the episode, indicating where sound EFX and music
should go. We're also designing titles, doing any looping that might
be required.  We now wait for the music to be scored, and for the
sound EFX to be designed. Give it another 10-14 days.  Now 7-8 weeks in.

     Finally, at that point -- 8-9 weeks or so -- we go in and do the
final sound mix, entering in all the finished elements, and deliver
the episode a week or so later.

                                                                       jms
STAR TREK: BUJOLD WALKS--RUMOR? #818976
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:11

     I believe you're thinking of a recent problem in Comics Forum, where
a journalist was MISquoting people (viz: me) in a certain magazine, without
my prior knowledge or permission, and I was leaving unless some procedures
were put in place protecting Forum members from having this happen to them,
particularly the pros.  This has been done, insofar as it *can* be done,
so that tussle is now over.

     On the topic of religion...yes, we've spent a fair amount of time
on the subject, and to your note that the "show has portrayed religion
exceptionally well; it is nice to know that faith is not dead in your
future as in all the ST shows," someone commented on another forum that
because I'm an atheist, and don't have any particular axe to grind, it's
possible to treat the beliefs of others with some measure of equanimity.
It seems a sensible idea, I hadn't really thought about it, and there may
be some measure of truth to that.

     I've always taken a great degree of interest in varying belief
systems. I've read the Bible cover to cover (twice), as well as
whatever other books I could get my hands on, from the Bahagavad Gita
(hope I spelled that right from memory) up and down the road.  What you
come away with is a sense that the religious impulse, whether or not
any one of them is fundamentally correct, is part of the human dynamic,
and it's not going to suddenly up and disappear.  The job of the writer
is to treat his subject honestly, and that seems to me the truth of the
matter.

     For six thousand years, humanity has been in the process of trying
to figure out itself, and where its place is in the universe, and what
the universe IS, really.  There are a number of ways one can approach
that question, and the religious impulse is part of that.  In the
earliest stages of its development, it was the religious impulse that
prompted us to look up to the stars and ask, "What?"...and to look at
ourselves and each other and say "Who?"...and to look at death and
say "Why?"  It was, in a sense, the earliest form of the scientific
method, except there weren't the tools for true inquiry.  But if humanity
had not begun with the process of asking questions, it might not have
developed science, since science is predicated upon self-awareness, and
questioning, and looking at the universe and asking those very same
questions.  The paths taken, and the means used, diverge quickly, and
I'm not in ANY way equating science and religion, they are of necessity
and by definition different creatures, but they share some roots in the
intentions that created them.

                                                                       jms
BABYLON 5: RELIGION IN B5 #820033
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 6:38:25

     Actually, we did have a pagan and a wiccan in there, though we
couldn't prolong the voice-over long enough to get there.  In at least
one other shot of that in dailies, it's very plainly there.

                                                                       jms
BABYLON 5: SURVIVORS #820918
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 2:39:18

     Definitely; there are additional fighters berthed inside Earthforce
One, with a minimum four outside on constant patrol.  In addition, it's
got some pretty hefty defensive weaponry on board, though they're worked
into the design so that they don't appear too obvious (bad for PR).

                                                                    jms
=================================
BABYLON 5: SCRIPTS AND CC #819567
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:39:12
FROM: SYSOP LEE WHITESIDE

Joe, I've watched a couple of B5 episodes with the closed captioning on
and it is interesting to see how what they display on screen is a lot of
times not quite what the cast is actually saying.  Do the Closed captioning
people work from a script or from a tape of the episode?
=================================
BABYLON 5: SCRIPTS AND CC #819569
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:55:22

     Supposedly they're working off scripts...not very well, from what
you're saying.

                                                                   jms
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #819568
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:55:21

     We get virtually *no* coverage from any major publications on
anything near a regular basis.  We're as close to a stealth television
program as you can get.  I think there'll be a small piece in Newsweek
as part of an overall roundup on TV/BBSing in a few weeks or less, but
that's all.

                                                                   jms
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #821230
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 7:29:11

     Yes, we've definitely gotten more coverage, and continue to do so,
in the UK than we do here in the US.  The show rates very highly on
Channel 4, and they've already committed to year two without having to
look at the first batch of episodes, which they don't usually do.  I
think the audience in the UK is more used to the kind of thing we're
doing, and so it's grabbing hold just that much more quickly.  Thus the
media pays more attention.  Ironic that we're having a harder time here
than overseas; it's usually the other way around.  (Apparently we're also
doing very well in other countries as well; in some cases, we do better
overseas than here in the US.)

                                                                   jms
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #820576
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 1:34:02

     Thanks, and to you guys on the ones you walked off with.

                                                                    jms

BABYLON 5: B5 SHIRTS/800TREKKER #822797
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:12

     I just saw some new shirt designs from a non-Creation licensee,
All-U, and they're *gorgeous*.  And some new Creation items, bookmarks
and pins, that also look quite nice.

                                                                   jms
=====
QUESTION #821957: LDS/Mormon missionary in the receiving line (PoD)?
=====
BABYLON 5: RELIGION ON B5 #822772
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:42:21

     Yes, I believe that's correct.

     No Scientologists, though.

                                       jms
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #822795
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:08

     Generally speaking, in the past, Starlog has generally screwed up
one aspect or another of their coverage of B5, to the point where I
won't have anything to do with them.  I won't stop my cast or crew from
talking to Starlog -- that's their choice, and I don't feel that in all
good conscience I can interfere -- but you won't see an interview with 
me in Starlog.

     Part of this is also due to the fact that Dave McDonnell has stated
to many people that he feels obliged to carry B5 coverage, because it's
a legitimate show, and it does draw attention...but because they are
primarily a STAR TREK magazine, they will NEVER do a B5 cover.  So they
get the coverage, but refuse to give it the respect it deserves with
a cover story.

     Which is pretty much what I expected.

                                                                    jms
==========
QUESTION #824019: <saw Rolling Stones ref in S&P; they
start war, have theme song> What did the rest of the
listing say?
===========
BABYLON 5: SIGNS & PORTENTS #824120
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 4:32:04 AM

     Some things are better left un-commented upon.

                                                jms
==========
QUESTION #823723: Why was the ship in Lady Ladira's name instead
of Lord Kiro's?
===========
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 12:03:23 AM #823906

     Ladira was Kiro's aunt, and much of the family money/property is
in her name.

                                                                  jms
STAR TREK: BUJOLD: THE REAL REASON! #823907
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 12:03:25 AM

     One thought indicating mercy for Bujold...apparently, according to
DAILY VARIETY, they were shooting 19 hour days.  This means that you
show up at 6 a.m. and don't leave until 2 a.m., counting makeup and
costume and other daily requirements.  (The schedule is apparently to
make up lost time for the debut.)  That's a *lot* to ask of ANY actor,
and if you're the lead, then that means you're in virtually every scene.
This isn't like showing up at 10 a.m. and going a few hours overtime;
this is, as stated, 6 a.m. to 2 a.m.

                                                                   jms
STAR TREK: BUJOLD: THE REAL REASON! #825165
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 4:39:14

     Actors do not generally share in merchandising revenue.  That goes
to Paramount.  (Or whichever studio is involved in a project.)

     Actors only get the salary for the series and movies they do.

     The fans do not bestow wealth on the players of Trek.

     For near 15 years after the original Trek, virtually none of the
cast members could get work.  They had been typecast.  It practically
killed some of their careers, and many of them have had virtually no
careers outside of the movies, which are few and far between.  Many
current ST cast members are concerned about any new work; which was
why Brent Spiner only agreed to do the movie after it was agreed in
his contract that he had to do two non-ST movies.

     The fans of a show view appearing in that show as a gift from God.

     An actor approaches it as a job, and has to.

     Just a word of perspective.

                                                                  jms
=======
QUESTION #825242: <applicable to most series actors?>
=======
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 5:59:17 #825746

     I suppose it depends on the level of performer you're talking about.

                                                                   jms
STAR TREK: NEW INFO ON BUJOLD #826219
DATE: SUN SEP 18, 1994 12:29:31

     The 154 days includes only weekdays.  (That's shooting 22 episodes
in 7 days each.)  Weekends are off.  Also, no single actor works all of
those 12 hours every day.  Some actors may appear in only one scene in
an episode, and to all intents and purposes have the rest of the week 
off. Or they may appear over several days, but staggered, a scene
here or there.

     Most of the time any actor spends in a day on set is waiting...
waiting for the lighting to get set, waiting for the camera to get moved
to another set, waiting for the director to block stuff out, waiting for
wardrobe or prosthetics or other areas.  When they're finally on, they
work a lot: first the master shot (of which there are often multiple
takes), then over-the- shoulder shots, then closeups, and sometimes
extreme closeups, anywhere from 2-7 takes each, which are then repeated
for every *other* actor in the scene.  It's hard, rigorous work.

     The main difference in all of this is whoever your lead is; the
captain in a role like this can often be there through every scene or
a majority of scenes...which adds up fast.

                                                                  jms
BABYLON 5: NEW NETWORKS #822796
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:10

     There was never talk of putting B5 on the WB network; its is only
PTEN, and if PTEN goes, so will B5.  (And if WB does go through with
its purchase of NBC, I have a feeling they won't need a separate WB
network, so that may go away, and again I don't know therefore if they'll
continue with PTEN either...and B5 wouldn't be shifted to network in
any event.)

                                                                   jms
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 4:32:03 AM #824119

     PTEN is a consortium of stations that have formed a partnership
with Warner Bros. Television.  Shows produced for PTEN are owned jointly
by WB and the stations.  It is *highly* unlikely that the station-owners
would allow a show to go from their side to a network of any kind, given
that this is their competition.

     PTEN is a fine organization, and I have every hope for its longevity.
Nothing here should be construed to mean anything else.  But many PTEN
spokespeople have stated that the weblet may, or may not, last beyond the
next few years, depending on corporate wrangling.  Should PTEN go, it
would take B5 with it, unless it were such a HUGE success by then that
WB could choose to try direct syndication.

     The Warner Bros. Network is a whole different corporate arm, and is
very competitive with PTEN.  They would not want in any way to take up
any PTEN shows because it would muddy their identity (and they're probably
right in this).

                                                                     jms
THE CON SUITE: ATHEISM AND HUMANISM #825770
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 6:25:16

     The Humanist Manifesto is known to very few, and read by fewer still.
Humanism is not a religion.  It has been defined that way by religionists
who want to be able to attack it.  "Humanism" by their definition is
anything they don't happen to like.  They created it and piled it high
with every conspiracy theory, every social change, and created this great
boogeyman that does not in fact exist.  Because hard-core religionists
MUST have some kind of crisis, some kind of looming spectre to pepetuate
the mindset that says they're standing against this dark force.  With the
fall of communism, now it's so-called humanism.

     Secular means only that, non-religous.  Humanism means concerned with
the affairs of humans.  It's not a religion in any way, manner, shape or
form; it has no collection plates, no churches, no doctrine, no schisms,
no ministers, no tax-free status, no deities, nothing.

     Okay, fine, so a few people got together and wrote a tract.  What
does this have to do with anything?  Nobody I know has ever read it. I've
never seen it in any bookstores.  You cling to this one tract as though
it were Proof Positive of the Great Secular Humanist Conspiracy. It was
just some people defining their attitudes, but this gets twisted around
into some terrible threat.  Sad that a few people expressing an opinion
in a tract that gets almost no circulation would be perceived as a threat
to the mighty religious empire of 24-hour-a-day religious programming,
and religious colleges, and massive religious text publishing companies,
and radio stations...don't you see the pathetic nature of this?  It's
like the elephant reeling in horror at a mouse.

     By your definition, anything that states a principle is a religion.
I'm sorry, but language means what it means, it doesn't mean what you
want it to mean.  A religion, according to the dictionary, requires the
belief in or worship of supernatural beings or gods.  But you play the
oldest game: redefine the terms of the argument in ways that benefit your
side.

     Let me repeat: this great Secular Humanist Conspiracy DOES NOT EXIST.
You and others like you have created it out of gossamer and a few pieces
of paper in order to have something to point at.  Tell me, do you think
there are Secular Humanist cell meetings in the middle of the night?
I'm an atheist, I sure as hell wasn't invited to any of them.  Where
Is it based? Where is its funding?  Where can I go to a meeting?

     So a few guys wrote down their opinions....again, so what?  They
speak for no one but themselves.  Just as I speak for no one but myself.

     You and others like you have come up with a name and shoved into it
whatever you don't like, then try to convince others that it exists.  It's
as simple as that.

                                                                    jms
========
COMMENT #825796: <poster says this is a rehash of previous
discussion that got nowhere> <indicates respectful disagreement &
moves on>
========
DATE: SUN SEP 18, 1994 12:29:28 #826218

     Of course...because you have no facts to back you up.

                                                       jms

THE CON SUITE: ROBERT BLOCH PASSES AWAY #833044
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 1:09:27 AM

     Tonight, at 8:30 p.m. Pacific Time, noted author and screenwriter
Robert Bloch, a good and kind man considered one of the brightest
lights in his field, passed away from cancer.

                                                                  jms
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 5:23:00 #833584

     Forrest Ackerman released that information *despite* being asked
by the family NOT to do so.  Everyone respected their decision to have
this kept private until he passed except Ackerman.  They were *very*
distressed that he released this.

                                                                jms
BABYLON 5: NO STORY IDEAS, PLEASE #828590
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:20:13

     Just a reminder not to post or send story ideas for episodes.
I've just had a flurry of them wind up in my email box, and I've
had to delete them without reading them, and send cranky notes
back to the people who sent them.  Story ideas open up legal
liabilities that potentially jeapordize my ability to stay here.
Please don't send them to me.  We're solid for the season at this
time, and virtually every story for the full five year run is more
or less plotted out.

     Thanks for listening.

                                                            jms
BABYLON 5: B5 SOUNDTRACK INFO #832408
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 3:17:14 PM

     At this point, the soundtrack wouldn't include the music
from the pilot in *any* event; the plan at this point is to do
just the series for now, and maybe the pilot later.  And if the
CD Chris plans to release is the same one as I've got now...it's
a LOT longer than 40 minutes, closer to 50 or a squidge more.
He's orchestrated the various cues into one long-playing suite,
so one flows into the other, and it's a whole piece that plays
on throughout the CD.  I'm very critical about music, and this
is *real* nice.

                                                           jms
BABYLON 5: B5 NOVELS? #829686
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994

     John Vornholt has turned in the first B5 novel to the publisher,
Dell; Lois Tilton is working on a second, and John will also do a
third.  The first novel, "Voices," should be out around January,
I'm told.

     We're doing something kinda unusual with both the novels and
the comic due out from DC, in that we're trying to keep them in line
with B5 continuity, so that they can be considered canon at a basic
level, rather than unrelated throwaways.

     I'm personally overseeing the novels (just finished my notes on
John's first book, very light line edits for the most part), as well
as the comic (in addition to writing the first issue, and providing
the story arc for the next 8 issues, taken to script by others).

     It should all be part of the overall story, not just done to make
some bucks.  It takes a little more work, but I think it's important.

                                                                  jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:20 #830922

     Ron Thornton keeps wanting to do a tech manual, so I'm sure it'll
happen in time.  Optic Nerve has already put together an Aliens of B5
guide for in-house use at this time (with material written by Larry
DiTillio), which may eventually see the light of day outside the B5
offices.  At present, no role playing games that I know of are in the
works.

                                                                  jms
BABYLON 5: JESUIT #828594
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:27:24

     There really is no "Jesuit connection" on B5.  While I was raised
Catholic (sorta), it wore off quickly.  But it's something I know about.
In talking with my spousal overunit Kathryn about this, she also felt
that if he were as Catholic as I'd made him out to be, he'd probably
have been trained by Jesuits, the closest things we have to theological
pit-bulls.  It made sense, so that's what he became.

                                                                   jms
BABYLON 5: MATEWAN #831939
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:19

     Er, actually, this was a reference to a real and traumatic
strike a number of years ago in a place called Matewan.  Different
place, and a real strike, immortalized in film.

                                                             jms
STAR TREK: SEAQUEST DSV OR TNG? #829163
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:17:12

     Here's comedy for you...I don't think I've ever received
as many "thank you" notes about Babylon 5 in any 48 hours as
I did in the 48 hours following the broadcast of the new SeaQuest....

                                                           jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:14 #831936

     "Do you make Babylon 5 too?!"

     No, just Babylon 5, I'm making no other shows at present.

                                                          jms
SF/FANTASY TV: SCHNEIDER RIPS SEAQUEST #830048
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994

     Hasburgh needs to get a clue, methinks....

     (And the "baby-in-a-bucket" scene you refer to was one of
the most moronic things I've ever seen; it guaranteed the kid
would die, given that we never saw it surface, or give any
inclination to surface; the only reason the kid survived was
that SQ was conveniently there...but of course they didn't know
this.  A trash receptacle, sinking to the ocean floor, with NO
oxygen supply, sealed and airtight...yeah, that's a *real* good
idea for keeping your kid alive.)

                                                             jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:16 #830920

     I really don't watch DS9, and thus don't really have an
opinion on the writing of the show.  The only time I see it
is if it's on while I'm walking through the room.

                                                         jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 3:14:31 #831284

     I try when possible to watch the debuts of new SF series, but
I generally don't have time to watch thereafter; I'm at the studio
from morning until 7:30, then I write at home until sometimes 3-4
a.m., with only a break for dinner, so watching *any* TV becomes
problematic at best.  I'm often forced to tape stuff and watch a
little of it on the weekend.  The only shows I try to catch weekly
are X-Files, TV Nation (when it was on, and let's hope it's renewed),
and MST3k.

     I tried to stay with SeaQuest, and made it through about the
first hour, but finally dived out; I just thought it was dumb and
juvenile and populated with breathtakingly annoying characters.
(Just one man's opinion; your mileage may vary.)  I wasn't able to
watch more than about 20 minutes of the new Lois and Clark, but that
was mainly due to work pressures; I hope to try and catch it again
this weekend.

     For my money, X-Files is still one of the spiffier shows on TV.

                                                                jms
SF/FANTASY TV: SAVE ROBO: NEW INFO! #831959
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 12:05:22 AM

     Word on the street is that it's too late, Robocop has been
officially canceled.

                                                             jms
---
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:18 #830921

     "Chrysalis," a cliffhanger of sorts, leads right into "Points
of Departure," which picks up some of the tables kicked over by
"Chrysalis," the balance of which are picked up in the second episode,
"Revelations."  By the end of the second new episode, pretty much
everything is now in place for the rest of the second season...though
not everything is in quite the same position as it originally was.

                                                                  jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 3:14:29 #831283

     Season two of Babylon 5 is 22 episodes, same as season one.

                                                             jms
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:08 #829159

     It's my understanding that Channel 4 has already agreed
to pick up season two, and it'll probably commence around the
same time as the American airdates start: November or thereabouts.

                                                           jms
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829684

     New B5 episodes will start late October, beginning with
the last episode of year one, "Chrysalis," followed the next
week by the season two opener, "Points of Departure."

                                                        jms
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #830041

     There is one more new season one episode remaining to be aired,
"Chrysalis," which airs mid-late October.  This is followed by the
second season debut, "Points of Departure," a week later.

                                                               jms
STAR TREK: VOYAGER SCRIPT #828589
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:20:06
TO: SYSOP LEE WHITESIDE

     We've been pretty good at keeping episode scripts out of
circulation; a couple have gotten out, but that's about it.

     What we do plan to do, a bit down the road, is to sell B5
scripts in a *proper* fashion: those who've written for us and want
their scripts sold, we'll sell through a still-in-the-planning-stage
fan liaison office.  (If they choose not to have their scripts sold,
that's fine too.)  The original writer will get a ROYALTY from each
copy sold, just like with a novel.  This is frankly how it *should*
be done...thus, that's how we're going to do it.

     (Insofar as I know, to the previous message here, Lincoln Enterprises
does not pay any kind of royalty to the authors of scripts they sell.)

                                                                  jms
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:54:18 #828933

     Stephen, you say that "there are plenty of ways to
legally obtain them," and then you cite as examples of
this "script vendors in the Hollywood area...(and) dealers
at cons."  NEITHER of these are legal, Stephen.  The *only*
legal means is through a studio/production company, and they
are rather tight with these things.

     This is a profound misunderstanding on your part.

                                                       jms
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:05 #829157

     Actually, the physical script *does* remain the property
of the writer, even in American TV.  The copyright to the
characters, the story, what's IN the script, is owned by the
studio/network (making pirating illegal on that level), while
the physical script is owned by the writer under separation
of rights (which makes the pirating doubly illegal).

                                                         jms
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 12:23:31 #828438

     Stephen...calm down.

     This (the matter of scripts floating around at script stores
and cons and the like) is a very difficult, touchy issue.  On the
one hand...I and any other script-pro loses money, and our copyright
is violated, every single time one of our scripts ends up in a
convention bin, photocopied endlessly.  On one hand, I take that
very personally, and when I find it at a convention, I remove the
copies from the dealer's table.  If the dealer has a problem, I urge
him to call security so that I in turn can press charges against him.
Because, frankly, they *are* dealing in stolen merchandise.  It's no
different than if someone photocopied the latest Dave Brin novel, and
was selling the copies at a convention.

     *On the other hand*....

     If I step away from my own vested interests for a moment, the
reality is that it's *very* hard to get one's hand on scripts, in
order to learn from them.  Early in my career, I bought a lot of
scripts from various script sellers, and at conventions, so that I
could study them and learn how to write scripts.  Even now, when I'm
at a convention, if I see the script to a show I want to study, to
see how the writer did it, I'm *very* tempted. Sometimes I give in.

     Is this a massive contradiction?  Absolutely.  And I have thus
far not figured out how to resolve it.

     The closest I've come is in deciding not to blame the person
who buys the script, as much as the person who sells it.  I've had
people come up to me at conventions with a copy of the B5 pilot
script, purchased on the "black market" and ask me to *sign it*.  I
debated for a long time how to handle this, and finally decided to
do so by signing it, and writing on the front page, THIS IS A
NON-AUTHORIZED COPY OF THIS SCRIPT, AND IS NOT FOR RESALE FOR PROFIT,
FOR ANY REASON ON EARTH, THIS IS ONLY (name's) PERSONAL COPY, PERIOD,
AND IF HE SELLS IT I WILL COME TO HIS HOUSE AND HUNT HIM DOWN LIKE
THE DOG HE IS.

     I've found this a *most* effective deterrent.

     Point being...the person to be yelled at is probably the dealer,
who knows full well what he's doing, rather than the person who buys
a script, not entirely aware of the details, only wanting a piece of
something that he or she experienced and enjoyed.

                                                                 jms
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829685

     Studios are not licensed to permit ANYONE to sell scripts
by the author; that is the right of the writer, period, unless
specifically given in contract (which would violate WGA's agreement).
Their general right to operate may have been renewed, but that's got
*nothing* to do with who has the right to sell scripts.

     And yes, generally speaking scripts can be bought in advance
of debut at many of these script operations.

                                                               jms
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829683

     Very few people, really, would want to read a script
in script form (in the case of novelizations).  The sales
of the former would be so small as to be negligible, and
wouldn't cut into the sales of the latter in any real way.

     Novelization rights are usually purchased with the rights
to the contents of the script, btw, and are generally controled
by the studio, as opposed to the physical script, with remains
with the writer.  In the case of B5, we don't intend to do any
novelizations of scripts in any event, so the question is moot.

                                                          jms
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 2:10:01 AM #832059

     Stephen...several real points of contention.

     1) Re: people giving the story away to you because they
read it...how is that any different than people who give the
story away to you because they saw it, or in a review?  I had
the same problem you did with EMPIRE, not because anyone bought
the script, but because a stupid reviewer in the San Diego Tribune
blabbed it all in his review...I was walking into the theater to
see ROCKY, having scrupulously avoided seeing any kind of reviews
or articles...and somebody coming out yelled, "ROCKY LOSES!"  This
is really a tangential issue.

     2) Re: other people not wanting to see the movie because
X-character dies...again, by the time the movie hits the theaters,
this information will be running around.  What difference is there
if that person makes up his mind on that basis now, or the day
before the movie opens?  This isn't about script leaks, this is
about people's eccentricities.  You seem to think that if scripts
aren't available, there will be this huge vacuum, and nobody will
know anything about a movie until they walk in the door.  This
simply ain't so.

     3) "When you steal those scripts, you are depriving Lincoln
of legitimate income."  Is it legitimate?  Again, the physical
ownership of a script is the writer's, unless it is specifically
transferred.

     4) "Paramount has to hire additional staff to track down
stolen scripts and enforce confidentiality."  To my knowledge,
Paramount does no such thing.  If they do, it doesn't come out
of the Star Trek production budget in any event.

     "That's money that could be invested in hiring better
writers..."  Do you think there's a two-tiered system, bad
writers cost X, good writers cost Y? The Writers Guild determines
salary minimums, and I don't believe that there is much wide
divergence in this area over there.  "or doing special effects or
buying that special script from an outside writer."

     Again, Stephen, as far as I know, ST pays the same rates for
all scripts that it buys, same as every other show in Hollywood.
There is no seperate category for "special scripts."  Again, the
WGA determines the price of scripts.  What you describe here, as
above, simply DOES NOT HAPPEN. And, again, any tracking-down of
scripts and stuff would be done by Paramount Legal Affairs division,
on behalf of ALL their shows, and would come out of that budget, not
the show budget.  That kind of cross collatorization isn't done,
because there'd be no way to keep track of it.

     Some of your points are fairly reasonble, but you don't buttress
your case by including wild fancy.

                                                                  jms
---
NOTE: RESPONSE TO DIFFERENT POSTER
---
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 5:06:01 #833576

     Of course, at the bottom-line, what you're saying is that if
someone chooses not to put something on the market, or cannot
viably do so, then it's okay to steal it, and folks shouldn't
complain when it happens.

                                                            jms
BABYLON 5: GILBERT SAYS O'HARE FIRED #829158
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:06

     I'm trying to track down a copy of the tape now, but I've
heard other characterizations of the interview as not being quite
so aggressive in this regard, in which she defended O'Hare.  This
is turning into a game of interpretations; once I have the tape
on hand, this should be clarified.

                                                             jms
=========
POST #829457: <person who has tape, offers to forward> <states
that O'Hare was mentioned 1 time, Melissa did not defend him>
=========
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829681

     Brett: if I can't dig it up elsewhere, yeah, I'll probably
take you up on that offer.  It's not a big thing, frankly, but
I generally prefer first hand knowledge of stuff, and certainly
your characterization has usually been spot-on.

                                                             jms
BABYLON 5: B5 IN TV GUIDE... #830919
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:15

     ...sigh...well, at least they acknowledged our existence
for a change.

                                                           jms
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:15 #831937

     Negative, Electronic Arts let the rights to the B5 game
lapse; they are now in the hands of Merit Software.

                                                         jms