The Lurker's Guide to Babylon 5
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

4140 lines
139 KiB

  1. JMS CompuServe messages for January 1997. Collected by John Hardin
  2. <jhardin@wolfenet.com>.
  3. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:31 -0700
  4. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  5. To: (blocked)
  6. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  7. Actually, I was in the shower...and I don't usually have a
  8. computer there, as it's rather dangerous.
  9. "I wondered if you know what you'll be doing after (B5 is) all
  10. over."
  11. Depends. WB is very interested in the sequel series, and we
  12. hope to have some info on that by the end of the month. That I'd
  13. definitely want to do. Barring that, I'd like to find a show or a
  14. structure where I could push the envelope again but in a different way.
  15. If I can't find a show like that, or create one, I'll go back to prose.
  16. jms
  17. ------------------------------
  18. Date: 31 Dec 1996 10:17:50 -0700
  19. From: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  20. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  21. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  22. Why weren't others willing to take a chance with B5? Because it was
  23. something new and different, or because you wanted to tell your story
  24. your way and they didn't like that?
  25. --Scott
  26. ------------------------------
  27. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:34 -0700
  28. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  29. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  30. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  31. Two primary reasons why it was a hard sell: 1) SF has *always*
  32. gone way over budget. The "V" series singlehandedly nearly destroyed
  33. Warner Bros. Television. Producers always said they could do it, and
  34. they lied, and the studios and networks were very skittish.
  35. 2) They're skittish about SF in general, and space stuff in
  36. particular. We were told, repeatedly, in verbatim terms, "No space
  37. series other than ST has ever survived more than a couple of sesaons.
  38. There is no market for space SF other than Star Trek. The market won't
  39. sustain it, isn't big enough to sustain it." That was, hands down, our
  40. single biggest stumbling block.
  41. jms
  42. ------------------------------
  43. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:36 -0700
  44. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  45. To: (blocked)
  46. Subject: Proper Boskonian duz JMS
  47. I'd love a copy, thanks, as I haven't seen it yet. Whole or
  48. just the clip, either is fine. You can send it to me via the B5 mail
  49. drop, at 14431 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 260, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423.
  50. Thanks.
  51. jms
  52. ------------------------------
  53. Date: 30 Dec 1996 21:51:46 -0700
  54. From: Ray Pelzer <70475.1263@compuserve.com>
  55. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  56. Subject: G'Kar's monologue
  57. > The writing of it...this is just an estimate, trying to remember, but
  58. > I think it took me about 10-15 minutes. Which is actually a long
  59. > time for me to stay parked on any part of the page.
  60. Well, now I don't feel so bad. I realize my brief, occasional
  61. scribbles don't come close to yours (or anyone else's), but I've found
  62. that when I try to put pen to paper, either it comes flying out at top
  63. speed, or it doesn't come out at all. That, and I tend to avoid heavy
  64. re-examination of what I've done - if I look at it too long, I start to
  65. second-guess myself.
  66. ------------------------------
  67. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:39 -0700
  68. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  69. To: Ray Pelzer <70475.1263@compuserve.com>
  70. Subject: G'Kar's monologue
  71. Exactly. Too often, errors come when you second guess yourself.
  72. The scripts of mine that have always worked the best were usually
  73. written in just a couple of days; the ones I nurse and revise and futz
  74. around with for a week or so are always the ones that perform less
  75. well.
  76. jms
  77. ------------------------------
  78. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:41 -0700
  79. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  80. To: (blocked)
  81. Subject: Message to Great Maker
  82. Sure...anything I write here can be reprinted elsewhere.
  83. "how do you do it? How many years has it been since you've seen
  84. genuine sunlight? =)"
  85. I think you just answered your own question.
  86. It's easy when you don't have a life outside the keyboard
  87. umbilicus.
  88. jms
  89. ------------------------------
  90. Date: 31 Dec 1996 17:04:19 -0700
  91. From: B <71513.2510@compuserve.com>
  92. To: JMS <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  93. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  94. I just read about your as yet fully formed concept of a B5 spinoff
  95. involving the rangers. I would like to know some of your specific ideas
  96. regarding this proposal. 1. Does the story take place before, during,
  97. or after the 5 year B5 arc? 2. What characters, assuming you
  98. can sign up the actors, would be involved?-Dellen, Marcus, Lanier,
  99. Sinclair ?
  100. John Morgan Devoted B5 Fan
  101. ------------------------------
  102. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:43 -0700
  103. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  104. To: B <71513.2510@compuserve.com>
  105. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  106. It would take place after the main B5 arc. As for specifics on
  107. cast, nothing can be said until things get closer to being nailed down;
  108. there's still a lot that can change on this, and it's a question of
  109. what works best for the show, and who wants to move on, and other
  110. aspects.
  111. jms
  112. ------------------------------
  113. Date: 01 Jan 1997 18:40:46 -0700
  114. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  115. To: (blocked)
  116. Subject: Do it all over again?
  117. I had nothing to do with the marketing of the series itself, so
  118. I can't affect that either way. What I'd do different with the
  119. show...I'd just love one more chance to adjust every episode, but
  120. that's an after-the-fact thing. What I'd do different otherwise...I
  121. dunno. Maybe nothing. You take a different tack, you just run into
  122. different problems, never fewer problems. So it's hard to say.
  123. Overall, I'm as pleased as anyone can be with a show.
  124. jms
  125. ------------------------------
  126. Date: 01 Jan 1997 22:28:58 -0700
  127. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  128. To: (blocked)
  129. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  130. Actually, I rather like most British cooking. My problem at the
  131. last Wolf was that the dining room was open for only -- what? -- 15
  132. minutes at a shot, and never when I was either awake or not on a panel,
  133. so all I had for four days, except for when we chose to go elsewhere
  134. (and that was difficult) was fish&chips. Four days of fish&chips. It
  135. will drive you mad. So finally, on Sunday morning, after the
  136. restaurant had closed (having expended its fifteen minutes of food) I
  137. planted myself in the restaurant regardless, and explained that unless
  138. I had a proper breakfast I was going to go out into the hall and do my
  139. version of Night of the Living Dead and start eating the flesh off the
  140. first person I encountered. They saw the crazed look in my eyes, and
  141. wisely fed me.
  142. jms
  143. ------------------------------
  144. Date: 02 Jan 1997 06:36:19 -0700
  145. From: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  146. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  147. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  148. > I saw most of it all at once, and spent the better part of a year
  149. > getting it all down on paper.
  150. The entire 1000+ years at once? What were you doing when that
  151. happened? So I am assuming the details have come as you've written the
  152. episodes and it was the overall scheme of things that came to you?
  153. When did you see the end of the story?
  154. Thanks for taking the time with these questions.
  155. --Scott
  156. ------------------------------
  157. Date: 02 Jan 1997 15:20:01 -0700
  158. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  159. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  160. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  161. I saw mainly the multi-year storyline of B5. The rest I filled
  162. in as I went, in terms of the backstory and forestory of the B5
  163. universe.
  164. jms
  165. ------------------------------
  166. Date: 02 Jan 1997 07:26:17 -0700
  167. From: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  168. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  169. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  170. > Two primary reasons why it was a hard sell: 1) SF has *always* gone
  171. > way over budget. The "V" series singlehandedly nearly destroyed
  172. > Warner Bros. Television. Producers always said they could do it, and
  173. > they lied, and the studios and networks were very skittish.
  174. Ok, now you got me really curious, what is your budget and do you ever
  175. run over?
  176. > 2) They're skittish about SF in general, and space stuff in
  177. > particular. We were told, repeatedly, in verbatim terms, "No space
  178. > series other than ST has ever survived more than a couple of sesaons.
  179. > There is no market for space SF other than Star Trek. The market
  180. > won't sustain it, isn't big enough to sustain it." That was, hands
  181. > down, our single biggest stumbling block.
  182. So what finally convinced WB to do B5, especially after V?
  183. --Scott
  184. ------------------------------
  185. Date: 02 Jan 1997 15:20:03 -0700
  186. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  187. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  188. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  189. Our budget is under $1 million per episode, and we have run
  190. slightly UNDER budget every season, which I think is a first for any SF
  191. series.
  192. To convince WB we first had to make the pilot, show we could do
  193. it responsibly, and get the ratings, THEN we got the series order.
  194. jms
  195. ------------------------------
  196. Date: 02 Jan 1997 11:13:18 -0700
  197. From: (blocked)
  198. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  199. Subject: Something . . .
  200. I've been meaning to ask for a while . . .
  201. How do think that your participation on the nets has affected you,
  202. your writing, and B5 as a whole?
  203. Earthstar and the Drifters T minus ?? days "Silly customer! You
  204. cannot hurt a Twinkie!" Babbler, SOLD!, KP, SP, Montie, SPAMM, etc.
  205. ------------------------------
  206. Date: 02 Jan 1997 15:20:06 -0700
  207. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  208. To: (blocked)
  209. Subject: Something . . .
  210. It's affected me in that it has put me in touch with the
  211. audience, which is a rarity in TV, where all you usually get are the
  212. raw numbers. It's given me a sense of the room, as it were. It's kept
  213. me answerable and responsive, and that has the side effect of keeping
  214. you modest and honest.
  215. It hasn't substantially affected the B5 storyline because the
  216. story is the story; any big committee, network or otherwise, will only
  217. work against you at the creative level.
  218. jms
  219. ------------------------------
  220. Date: 02 Jan 1997 18:51:51 -0700
  221. From: Gabriel Koerner <76767.3523@compuserve.com>
  222. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  223. Subject: Message to Great Maker
  224. I'm wondering, Joe, do you at all know Harlan Ellison? I'm a fan of
  225. his works...
  226. As a literary SF lover, I'm sure you've read Asimov. My favorite works
  227. of his are the Foundation novels (atleast the original trilogy... the
  228. only one I liked of the later four was "Foundation's Edge", and even
  229. that paled in comparison with the original trilogy). I'm also an avid
  230. fan of his robot novels...
  231. Do you, with all your responsibilities, still have time to delve into
  232. the realm of literary science fiction?
  233. --Gabriel
  234. ------------------------------
  235. Date: 03 Jan 1997 02:04:18 -0700
  236. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  237. To: Gabriel Koerner <76767.3523@compuserve.com>
  238. Subject: Message to Great Maker
  239. Harlan's our consultant on the show, and has been my friend for
  240. many years. So I definitely know his work.
  241. jms
  242. ------------------------------
  243. Date: 02 Jan 1997 21:59:40 -0700
  244. From: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  245. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  246. Subject: Is it my breath?
  247. (This didn't seem to be *that* bad a question, so I figure you might
  248. have missed it the first time I sent it. If you ignored it on
  249. purpose, then just ignore it again -- I'll get the drift.)
  250. Joe,
  251. Should we assume that Major Atumbe isn't part of the command staff
  252. of the Army of Light? I take it that he/she's still third in command
  253. of the station (although why was Delenn running C&C in "The Summoning"?
  254. I know, Atumbe works the night shift...), but not in the command ranks
  255. of the AoL.
  256. I say this, because you would think Atumbe'd be present at some of
  257. the important War Council meetings if he/she were involved in that side
  258. of things (I mean if Zack, a sergeant, is present, you'd think Atumbe,
  259. a major, would be present).
  260. I realize that production-wise, it simply isn't realistic to cast
  261. someone to play Atumbe and, essentially, add a new regular character,
  262. so that's why I'm going on the assumption that Atumbe is part of the B5
  263. chain of command and not part of the AoL chain of command. Is this a
  264. fair assumption? Will Atumbe ever be seen or the character's role in
  265. things ever addressed?
  266. Thanks,
  267. -- Brent (who, for some reason, thinks about these obscure details
  268. during re-run season)
  269. ------------------------------
  270. Date: 03 Jan 1997 02:04:20 -0700
  271. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  272. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  273. Subject: Is it my breath?
  274. I'd assume he'd mainly stay within his division; not everybody
  275. is in the AoL chain of command, or it'd get unweildy.
  276. jms
  277. ------------------------------
  278. Date: 03 Jan 1997 05:09:35 -0700
  279. From: (blocked)
  280. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  281. Subject: TD: Rod Serling
  282. This New Year's the Sci-Fi Channel ran a Twilight Zone marathon, and I
  283. watched Rod Serling's little gem called "The Monsters Are Due on Maple
  284. Street" for the umpteenth time, and am compelled once more to marvel
  285. publicly at the genius of this man. He could pack so many levels of
  286. meaning into a brief 30 minute screenplay, and without a single special
  287. effect in sight.
  288. My age hadn't quite hit the double digits when TZ first aired, so I
  289. guess I wouldn't have realized it then, but he did quite a lot of
  290. pieces that referred in some way to the Blacklist and the McCarthy era.
  291. And I noticed that Art Carney's character in the Santa Claus teleplay
  292. was named "Corwin". Did he know Norman Corwin? Serling himself was
  293. never blacklisted, was he? But clearly the issue affected him deeply.
  294. ------------------------------
  295. Date: 03 Jan 1997 16:18:03 -0700
  296. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  297. To: (blocked)
  298. Subject: TD: Rod Serling
  299. Everyone who came up as a writer during that time was in danger
  300. of being blacklisted or greylisted, or at minimum knew other writers
  301. and actors who had been listed and had their careers killed. Some
  302. actors, like Jeff Corey, didn't work again for almost 20 years. So
  303. certainly it had a profound effect on Serling and others.
  304. As for Corwin...yes, Rod was a big fan of Norman's work, and
  305. cited him as a kind of writer's writer. He began trying to do
  306. Corwin-like stuff, as did Bradbury and many other writers. Norman is
  307. one of those writers whose work may not be known to the public as well
  308. as it should, but writers, any writer interested in genuine quality of
  309. language and vision...we know his work. People like Bradbury and Stan
  310. Freberg and Charles Kuralt and others have all described themselves as
  311. "Norman's kids" for the inspiration he has provided.
  312. jms
  313. ------------------------------
  314. Date: 03 Jan 1997 16:18:04 -0700
  315. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  316. To: (blocked)
  317. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  318. Yup. I remember. You seemed quite fuddled to run into me
  319. there.
  320. jms
  321. ------------------------------
  322. Date: 03 Jan 1997 11:29:20 -0700
  323. From: (blocked)
  324. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  325. Subject: Something . . .
  326. > It's kept me answerable and responsive, and that has the side effect
  327. > of keeping you modest and honest.
  328. And that's one of the main reasons we like you . . . sort of a
  329. symbiotic relationship, or something. . .
  330. > It hasn't substantially affected the B5 storyline because the story
  331. > is the story; any big committee, network or otherwise, will only work
  332. > against you at the creative level.
  333. Have you ever done anything on the show because of a feeling or
  334. request on the nets?
  335. Earthstar and the new kitty T minus ?? days "Silly customer! You
  336. cannot hurt a Twinkie!" Babbler, SOLD!, KP, SP, Montie, SPAMM, etc.
  337. ------------------------------
  338. Date: 03 Jan 1997 16:18:05 -0700
  339. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  340. To: (blocked)
  341. Subject: Something . . .
  342. Nothing substantial that I can think of, no.
  343. jms
  344. ------------------------------
  345. Date: 03 Jan 1997 13:11:57 -0700
  346. From: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  347. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  348. Subject: Is it my breath?
  349. Re: Atombe
  350. As I suspected. Thanks. But, did you catch the final part of my
  351. post? Will we ever see/hear of/from Atombe at any point in the story or
  352. is he just background texture?
  353. -- Brent
  354. ------------------------------
  355. Date: 03 Jan 1997 16:18:06 -0700
  356. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  357. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  358. Subject: Is it my breath?
  359. Depends on if I can work it in seamlessly or not. It's kinda
  360. late in the day to begin introducing characters.
  361. jms
  362. ------------------------------
  363. Date: 04 Jan 1997 17:11:59 -0700
  364. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  365. To: (blocked)
  366. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  367. Yes, well, we've all been keeping tabs on your movements, you
  368. know....
  369. jms
  370. ------------------------------
  371. Date: 04 Jan 1997 10:07:35 -0700
  372. From: (blocked)
  373. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  374. Subject: Something . . .
  375. > Nothing substantial that I can think of, no.
  376. Other than, of course, the Gethesmane incident . . .
  377. Earthstar and the new kitty T minus ?? days "There's naught wrong
  378. wiv gala luncheons, lad! And doan't you forget it!" Babbler, SOLD!,
  379. KP, SP, Montie, SPAMM, etc.
  380. ------------------------------
  381. Date: 04 Jan 1997 17:12:01 -0700
  382. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  383. To: (blocked)
  384. Subject: Something . . .
  385. Yes, but that was a case of *not* doing a story for fear of
  386. legal complications, rather than fan interaction contributing to the
  387. show.
  388. jms
  389. ------------------------------
  390. Date: 03 Jan 1997 19:09:35 -0700
  391. From: SysOp Dupa T Parrot <70040.104@compuserve.com>
  392. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  393. Subject: The Nature of Shadows
  394. Joe,
  395. In "Interludes and Examinations", Morden had to physically open the
  396. door to Kosh's quarters in order for the Shadows to enter even though
  397. they appeared to pass through the walls.
  398. In the the "Garibaldi's Last Stand" scene in "Babylon Squared" and
  399. "War Without End Pt 1," it was implied that those attacking had to cut
  400. through the walls in order to invade (and the hole was not
  401. Shadow-shaped).
  402. Why is this? Or will this be covered later this season?
  403. -SysOp Dupa T. Parrot, Technical Consultant
  404. dupa@compuserve.com http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dupa
  405. OzWin 2.11 O-
  406. ------------------------------
  407. Date: 04 Jan 1997 17:12:06 -0700
  408. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  409. To: SysOp Dupa T Parrot <70040.104@compuserve.com>
  410. Subject: The Nature of Shadows
  411. Well, large boarding parties tend to cut through walls to get
  412. large groups through, as they did in "Severed Dreams."
  413. jms
  414. ------------------------------
  415. Date: 04 Jan 1997 02:30:07 -0700
  416. From: (blocked)
  417. To: All
  418. Subject: Paramount STRIKES!!!
  419. With Christmas about to set in, people around the world were busy in
  420. preparation for the holiday. Out of nowhere, Viacom / Paramount
  421. started handing out Christmas presents to numerous web master a legal
  422. warning letter to tell them close down their Star Trek Internet web
  423. site or else.
  424. For those of you who want to read about the letter, here is an
  425. abstract:
  426. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  427. ---------
  428. ----- Re: Infringements of STAR TREK Copyrights and Trademarks
  429. Dear (name here):
  430. I write as attorney for Paramount Pictures Corporation ("Paramount").
  431. As you are, no doubt, aware, Paramount owns all the rights to the
  432. television series entitled STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION, STAR TREK:
  433. DEEP SPACE NINE, STAR TREK: VOYAGER, and all theatrical releases
  434. relating thereto (collectively the "STAR TREK Properties"). These
  435. rights are protected by numerous copyrights trademarks in both the
  436. programs themselves and the characters, sets, and other elements
  437. appearing in those programs.
  438. We have recently learned that you have posted various elements of the
  439. STAR TREK Properties on your site at (web site address here). Your
  440. posting of these items is an infringement of Paramounts copyright and
  441. trademark rights in the STAR TREK Properties.
  442. Paramount does not, of course, object to all materials posted on the
  443. Internet relating to the STAR TREK Properties. For example, Paramount
  444. does not object to the general discussion of "Star Trek" over the
  445. Internet. However, when such discussions rise to the level of copying
  446. full scripts or excerpts therefrom, or providing detailed summaries of
  447. the works, suck transmissions are clear infringements of Paramounts
  448. rights. Similarly, posting of copyrighted material such as photographs,
  449. artistic renditions of "Star Trek" characters or other properties,
  450. sound files, video clips, books or excerpts thereform are likewise
  451. infringements of Paramounts rights.
  452. Based upon the foregoing, we hereby demand that you confirm to us in
  453. writing within ten days of receipt of this letter that: (I) you have
  454. removed all infringing materials from your site, including all images,
  455. sound bites, and video clips; and (ii) you will refrain from posting
  456. any similar material on the Internet or any other on-line service in
  457. the future.
  458. The foregoing is without waiver of any and all rights of Paramount
  459. Pictures Corporation, all of which are expressly reserved herein.
  460. (Lawyers name here)
  461. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
  462. -
  463. Whats Wrong? Viacom Has Every Right To Do This!
  464. True! Even I must agree. Viacom's action seems so reasonable ... and
  465. yet to completely idiotic as not to be believed!
  466. One thing must make clear at this point. IF a site private Star Trek
  467. Properties for use in commercial manner or in any other way related to
  468. commercial activity, then Viacoms action is a just one. But what
  469. happens here is very different. How can a site maintained by a 14-year
  470. old kid be a thread? Most sites were created and maintained by Star
  471. Trek fans, these sites never charged a single cent. These sites were
  472. created as a publicity and promotion mean to introduce others to the
  473. show. It is these sites that saved Paramount billions in advertising.
  474. It is these sites that snow ball paramounts income in the first place.
  475. Star Trek had been and shall continues to be Paramounts valuable
  476. asset. What makes Star Trek successful is the fans behind the show. It
  477. is the fans who frock to theater to see the Star Trek movies; it is the
  478. fans who pay for memorials; it is the fans who promoted the show to
  479. others. For some mysterious reason, Viacom also think it is the fans
  480. that is hurting their profits???
  481. Is Viacom stupid enough to believe one will settle for an poster image
  482. instead of the real thing? One will be satisfy by owning a 10-second
  483. sound clip instead of a sound track? One will opted for a 20-second
  484. video clip instead of the video tape or laser disc?
  485. Internet was a place for freedom of speech, and I fail to see Trekkers
  486. had abused their right. On the contrary, images, sound clips and video
  487. clips are more like a bate to seduce us to buy the real thing and in
  488. return, put our hard earned cash into Paramounts pocket.
  489. I sincerely hope Viacom will come to its sense REAL SOON. Otherwise,
  490. the Trek community will become so hurt that it might not exist any more
  491. If you want to learn more about this disaster, use the site
  492. http://www.stwww.com/viacom.html as your starting point to learn more.
  493. If you feel it is time to act, please write to Viacom or Paramount and
  494. let them know your feelings.
  495. :) Rgds.
  496. ------------------------------
  497. Date: 04 Jan 1997 18:05:13 -0700
  498. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  499. To: (blocked)
  500. Subject: Paramount STRIKES!!!
  501. This is a most unfortunate development. But there are some ways
  502. you can try to deal with this constructively.
  503. Last year, WB became aware of the existence of many BABYLON 5
  504. sites, and the Legal Affairs Department was of a mind to take similar
  505. action (as has been taken by other shows, including the Simpsons). The
  506. reason for their desire is simple. It's not that the sites present a
  507. *threat* per se, but there is the issue of copyright protection at
  508. stake.
  509. To explain...and this may help you to at least understand
  510. Paramount's position, even if you don't agree with it...if copyrighted
  511. material begins to be passed around freely, and copied, and
  512. redistributed, and published, without the proper protections,
  513. eventually the material will become *public domain*. The studio no
  514. longer owns it. In order to demonstrate that you own the material, you
  515. must make consistent, and conscientious efforts to protect your claim
  516. to that name and/or that property.
  517. Many companies and individuals have actually *lost* the right to
  518. the copyright of material they own or created because they did not take
  519. steps to actively protect it. Which is why you often see
  520. advertisements from companies like Xerox reminding people that it's a
  521. *company name*, and not a generic term for photocopying. Otherwise
  522. they risk letting that name become a word, part of the vernacular, and
  523. as indefensible as saying "tissue paper" is a copyrightable term.
  524. When material from a show is posted without the proper copyright
  525. protection, every time you allow this to happen it moves that material
  526. further and further into public domain. Once it *becomes* public
  527. domain, the studio will not be able to profit from it, ownership
  528. questions come up, and outside agencies can produce anything they want,
  529. slap that name on it, and sell it. It's a cumulative effect, over time.
  530. And it *is* a real problem; don't delude yourself by saying so because
  531. you *want* it not to be so. The law is the law is the law.
  532. When this came to our attention, we (acting sort of as fan
  533. advocates) sat down with WB legal and discussed ways of doing it short
  534. of sending out these exact sort of letters to BABYLON 5 sites. What we
  535. came to was the following understanding: that WB would not actively go
  536. after sites which used B5 photos and other material PROVIDED THAT the
  537. proper copyright information was appended to the material utilized.
  538. They are currently in the process of verifying and evaluating sites
  539. before sending letters telling them to append this information.
  540. This seems to me a fair and reasonable response to what is, in
  541. truth, a genuine concern. What may help here is for system operators
  542. of web sites to append the copyright information, and notify Paramount
  543. that they are in full and complete compliance with copyright, and
  544. acknowledge formally that Paramount is the owner of all copyrighted
  545. material posted on that site. They may, or may not, accept that, but
  546. it gives you a place to start. Obviously, magazines use copyrighted
  547. images all the time, and Paramount makes no effort to stop that...but
  548. if you look in the edges along photos and the like in these magazines,
  549. you will see the words "photo copyright (c) 1997 Paramount Television."
  550. That is the difference that allows them to use this material. There is
  551. no immediate reason why sites should be viewed in any way differently
  552. than a magazine, IF the laws are followed.
  553. (Interestingly, there's a debate in the TV community about the
  554. copyright of the original ST being in some dispute, since for about 10
  555. years Paramount did little to protect the name of the original ST,
  556. until the first movie came around. I have no actual information on
  557. that, however, nor can I comment beyond just remarking on the topic.
  558. If there *is* any merit to it, that might further explain their
  559. reasonable concern about it happening with current material.)
  560. So point is...the concern expressed by Paramount is legitimate,
  561. and you should abide by it, OR see if you can find some compromise
  562. position by adhering strictly to the copyright laws in how material is
  563. displayed, and what material is selected, as we have done with the B5
  564. sites. You may also want to write to those currently running the ST
  565. franchise to see if the producers of the show can intercede on the
  566. behalf of ST fans as we did for B5 fans. Lawyers have little or no
  567. vested interest in the fan/show relationship; those involved directly
  568. in these shows, do have a vested interest.
  569. Usual disclaimer: I am not an attorney, and can only speak from
  570. anecdotal information, and have no specific information about
  571. Paramount, and am in no way suggesting any difference of opinion with
  572. their actions. I'm only trying to help you understand the issues
  573. involved.
  574. jms
  575. ------------------------------
  576. Date: 04 Jan 1997 19:24:36 -0700
  577. From: Mary Taylor <75530.2650@compuserve.com>
  578. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  579. Subject: Paramount STRIKES!!!
  580. Everything you say is correct, of course, but I'm convinced that with
  581. the Viacom/Paramount decision much more is at stake than the mere
  582. protection of their copyrights. If that were all they were concerned
  583. about, less draconian action, like the action taken by Warner, could
  584. have been chosen. I'm convinced that the MSN site has everything to do
  585. with their decision. Many fan sites were far superior to anything over
  586. at Continuum (I don't belong to MSN and don't intend to, but a friend
  587. does for her business, and I've seen the site), and thus in direct
  588. competition with the exclusive, money driven MSN site. Of course I'm
  589. sure you know all this, but I'm just raising the point.
  590. ------------------------------
  591. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:23:25 -0700
  592. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  593. To: Mary Taylor <75530.2650@compuserve.com>
  594. Subject: Paramount STRIKES!!!
  595. Urk...I'd forgotten about the MSN site. I wonder also if there
  596. is any advertising at that site. That might also prompt them to want
  597. to drive people there for ST material, so they can ensure there's only
  598. one place in town to get it, and then collect ad revenue. Nothing
  599. wrong with advertising on a web site in and of itself, of course; it's
  600. a natural progression that will, in time, give sites greater resources
  601. to do stuff. Most web sites are "dead web," interesting to look at,
  602. but with the resources to make the site very deep.
  603. jms
  604. ------------------------------
  605. Date: 04 Jan 1997 18:19:09 -0700
  606. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  607. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  608. Subject: Proper Boskonian duz JMS
  609. from message #631358 >>RebelCon 1997 is coming August 8-10, 1997 at the
  610. same Taunton Holiday Inn in Massachusetts that saw this year's
  611. successful convention on July 5-7, 1996. This year's announced guests
  612. (as of January 1, 1997) are: J. Michael Straczynski, creator and
  613. producer of Babylon 5 (in one of his few East Coast appearances!);<<
  614. Joe, I'm just curious, but do you have some kind of an
  615. aversion to New York? :) I guess to see you at a
  616. convention I'd have to travel out of state.
  617. ------------------------------
  618. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:23:27 -0700
  619. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  620. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  621. Subject: Proper Boskonian duz JMS
  622. Actually, I'm doing the Icon convention in Long Island this
  623. spring, so that's closer to your turf.
  624. jms
  625. ------------------------------
  626. Date: 04 Jan 1997 18:19:04 -0700
  627. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  628. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  629. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  630. > It would take place after the main B5 arc. As for specifics on cast,
  631. > nothing can be said until things get closer to being nailed down;
  632. > there's still a lot that can change on this, and it's a question of
  633. > what works best for the show, and who wants to move on, and other
  634. > aspects.
  635. It sure sounds like Claudia is with you if you want her there.
  636. <g>
  637. I was encouraged by how happy she is not only to be
  638. with this show, but *why* she's glad to be with it, and her high praise
  639. for you and your ability was beyond reproach. Quite frankly, she may
  640. have even gotten some people within your industry a bit hot under the
  641. collar by what she said, which delights me to no end. However, it may
  642. not be in her best interest to do such things unless she's real
  643. confident in her ability as an actress and is not worried about
  644. politics standing in the way of her career.
  645. ------------------------------
  646. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:23:29 -0700
  647. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  648. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  649. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  650. Claudia is notoriously fearless. Actually, that applies to most
  651. of our cast, which is fun. If you see interviews with our cast,
  652. they're right out there on the edge, being outrageous...because that's
  653. who and what they are.
  654. jms
  655. ------------------------------
  656. Date: 04 Jan 1997 18:33:00 -0700
  657. From: SysOp Dupa T Parrot <70040.104@compuserve.com>
  658. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  659. Subject: The Nature of Shadows
  660. > Well, large boarding parties tend to cut through walls to get large
  661. > groups through,
  662. Yeah, I can see *that*.
  663. But what about the scene in "Interludes and Examinations" where, after
  664. Morden opens the door, the Shadows appear to pass through the walls. If
  665. they can pass through the walls, why do they need an opening?
  666. -SysOp Dupa T. Parrot, Technical Consultant
  667. dupa@compuserve.com http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dupa
  668. OzWin 2.11 O-
  669. ------------------------------
  670. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:23:32 -0700
  671. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  672. To: SysOp Dupa T Parrot <70040.104@compuserve.com>
  673. Subject: The Nature of Shadows
  674. They're not passing through the walls, they're just phasing into
  675. the visible spectrum. It's probably something of an optical illusion
  676. given the distance between the walls and themselves.
  677. jms
  678. ------------------------------
  679. Date: 04 Jan 1997 18:19:08 -0700
  680. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  681. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  682. Subject: Sci Fi Universe
  683. Joe,
  684. Have you read the article in the latest edition of Sci Fi
  685. Universe magazine? They were mostly very good to you and your entire
  686. team in their articles. There was one main article and several small
  687. ones pertaining to standout episodes. I suspect you must have seen it
  688. by now.
  689. ------------------------------
  690. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:23:34 -0700
  691. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  692. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  693. Subject: Sci Fi Universe
  694. No, haven't seen it yet...will probably get it this week.
  695. jms
  696. ------------------------------
  697. Date: 05 Jan 1997 02:33:27 -0700
  698. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  699. To: (blocked)
  700. Subject: Paramount STRIKES!!!
  701. Again, this was a conversation we had with WB, and as long as
  702. sites have a link to either the WB site or the official B5 fanclub
  703. site, we don't see a problem in coexisting.
  704. jms
  705. ------------------------------
  706. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:41:04 -0700
  707. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  708. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  709. Subject: Proper Boskonian duz JMS
  710. > Actually, I'm doing the Icon convention in Long Island this spring, so
  711. > that's closer to your turf.
  712. Excellent!
  713. Can you tell me the dates and location? I really would
  714. like to be there for it.
  715. ------------------------------
  716. Date: 05 Jan 1997 02:33:28 -0700
  717. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  718. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  719. Subject: Proper Boskonian duz JMS
  720. It's the April 4th weekend, at the University of Stony Brook,
  721. Long Island. Harlan will also be present, and many others.
  722. jms
  723. ------------------------------
  724. Date: 04 Jan 1997 23:42:37 -0700
  725. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  726. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  727. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  728. > Claudia is notoriously fearless. Actually, that applies to most of
  729. > our cast, which is fun. If you see interviews with our cast, they're
  730. > right out there on the edge, being outrageous...because that's who
  731. > and what they are.
  732. I tell ya, I really loved it! <g> It came right near the very
  733. end of the article and it was the last thing I expected to see. :)
  734. Go Claudia!! <bg>
  735. ------------------------------
  736. Date: 05 Jan 1997 02:33:30 -0700
  737. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  738. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  739. Subject: "Crusade" Spinoff?
  740. BTW, which article are you referring to?
  741. jms
  742. ------------------------------
  743. Date: 05 Jan 1997 14:31:29 -0700
  744. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  745. To: (blocked)
  746. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  747. You can *never* be paranoid enough.
  748. (BTW, you left your window open again last night.)
  749. jms
  750. ------------------------------
  751. Date: 05 Jan 1997 05:30:43 -0700
  752. From: (blocked)
  753. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  754. Subject: Historical reference?
  755. In my most recent viewing of Hour of the Wolf, I noticed that the
  756. metalwork in Cartagia's palace looks suspiciously like the "rising sun"
  757. emblem of Japan. Is there a historical significance that my meager
  758. knowledge of history in general and military history in particular is
  759. preventing me from seeing, or did it just look cool? All I can come up
  760. with is a parallel between Cartagia and a kami-kazi pilot.
  761. ------------------------------
  762. Date: 05 Jan 1997 14:31:30 -0700
  763. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  764. To: (blocked)
  765. Subject: Historical reference?
  766. I think it's just a general sense of empire style symbols,
  767. nothing specific to Japan.
  768. jms
  769. ------------------------------
  770. Date: 05 Jan 1997 12:23:02 -0700
  771. From: mike lovitt <75021.1731@compuserve.com>
  772. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  773. Subject: The Centauri Eye
  774. Mr Stracznski:
  775. With the show in reruns I've been thinking about the
  776. Centauri Eye. How long was it missing, and its been along time since
  777. I've seen it, but has it been shown recently?
  778. Mike
  779. ------------------------------
  780. Date: 05 Jan 1997 14:31:32 -0700
  781. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  782. To: mike lovitt <75021.1731@compuserve.com>
  783. Subject: The Centauri Eye
  784. The eye is now safely back home and on display.
  785. jms
  786. ------------------------------
  787. Date: 05 Jan 1997 14:53:24 -0700
  788. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  789. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  790. Subject: Broadcasting in order?
  791. Joe,
  792. Apparently someone over there at WB has finally woken up out of the
  793. fog because they're actually showing the repeats in the order that
  794. they're supposed to be shown. This is a first!
  795. Were you made aware that they were going to start doing this?
  796. I'm just curious, but it's about time!
  797. ------------------------------
  798. Date: 05 Jan 1997 22:03:38 -0700
  799. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  800. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  801. Subject: Broadcasting in order?
  802. They asked us what order this latest batch should go in, and we
  803. made a suggestion. It seems to be working well.
  804. jms
  805. ------------------------------
  806. Date: 05 Jan 1997 21:11:32 -0700
  807. From: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  808. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  809. Subject: Hour of the Wolf
  810. Joe,
  811. WWOR stationed in NJ, which also happens to be my NY station,
  812. threw me a curve ball this week by airing B5 Saturday night at 8:00
  813. p.m., and then again on Sunday night at 8:00 p.m.. This has me
  814. wondering if they're thinking of moving the show back to its Sunday
  815. night slot at 8:00, which they abandoned back on September 26th when
  816. they moved it to Saturday nights at eight.
  817. At any rate, I ended up watching the same episode back to back
  818. both nights, which really didn't bother me because it's a pivotal
  819. episode which I enjoyed. I'm writing you this because I must tell you
  820. that I've gotten such a kick out of the way in which he handled
  821. bringing Emperor Cartegia into the arc. When first we see him, he's
  822. sporting a new hairstyle not fitting with Centauri tradition. Right
  823. away this is a sort of "heads up" for the viewer to take notice of, but
  824. it's not clear why. Does he view this new trend which he's stirred up
  825. to be "chic," perhaps simply because he is young, or is he somehow
  826. mentally and\or emotionally off balance? He's smart enough to assess
  827. Molari during the first meeting that we the viewers get to see between
  828. these two men, and we know he's up to something, though we're not sure
  829. what. It all becomes clear once he spouts his "deification" speech to
  830. Molari, and I must commend you on handling the scenario most
  831. effectively. It is not until this point that both we and Molari get to
  832. truly see the Emperor for what he is for the first time --insane. <G>
  833. When Molari first enters the room he is so alarmed, so irritated, so
  834. utterly frustrated by what the Emperor has done that he dares to grab
  835. at his arm as if he were scolding an incorrigible child. Only moments
  836. later does he realize what he's truly up against, a mad ruler, and his
  837. utter speechlessness upon listening to the Emperor's insane notion is
  838. priceless! <bg> It is also a true credit to Peter Jurasik as an actor,
  839. who earns more of my respect for him as a performer on a seemingly
  840. regular basis.
  841. Anyway, just a little aside about something which I
  842. particularly appreciated. I know that what we're looking at when we see
  843. Cartegia is a reincarnation of Caligula, but it's all just so much fun
  844. to watch. :) This episode also got me wondering about how Morden will
  845. meet his end, and at whose hands, Molari's or the Shadows.
  846. Cheers for producing such quality entertainment! ;-)
  847. ------------------------------
  848. Date: 05 Jan 1997 22:03:40 -0700
  849. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  850. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  851. Subject: Hour of the Wolf
  852. Thanks; it's a nifty little episode, and it sneaks up on one
  853. very nicely.
  854. jms
  855. ------------------------------
  856. Date: 06 Jan 1997 15:41:15 -0700
  857. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  858. To: (blocked)
  859. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  860. "everybody being mean to me"
  861. Well, there *was* that petition, after all....
  862. jms
  863. ------------------------------
  864. Date: 06 Jan 1997 20:03:12 -0700
  865. From: Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com>
  866. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  867. Subject: Perfect Beauty Training
  868. jms -
  869. Upon rewatching "...Wolf" one slight question occurred to me:
  870. When Kosh was "tutoring" Sheridan and set up the Moment of Perfect
  871. Beauty, did Kosh have the Lorien experience in mind as something for
  872. which to prepare, or was the relinquishing of the pin leading to an
  873. interesting encounter more to do with authorial artistry?
  874. -rje-
  875. I can almost feel the rustling-in of some kind of enchantment already.
  876. ------------------------------
  877. Date: 07 Jan 1997 12:56:17 -0700
  878. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  879. To: Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com>
  880. Subject: Perfect Beauty Training
  881. I think it was a more general sense than preparing him
  882. specifically for Lorien.
  883. jms
  884. ------------------------------
  885. Date: 07 Jan 1997 12:56:18 -0700
  886. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  887. To: (blocked)
  888. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  889. Something like *that*, you only need to do it once.
  890. jms
  891. ------------------------------
  892. Date: 07 Jan 1997 16:16:41 -0700
  893. From: (blocked)
  894. To: Joe Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  895. Subject: Garibaldi's Badge
  896. Hi joe,
  897. My friend dennis Queally wants to know whose police badge that was in
  898. Garibaldi's room in the HOTW.
  899. Thanks mike
  900. ------------------------------
  901. Date: 07 Jan 1997 21:16:13 -0700
  902. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  903. To: (blocked)
  904. Subject: Garibaldi's Badge
  905. It was a prop.
  906. jms
  907. ------------------------------
  908. Date: 07 Jan 1997 16:49:17 -0700
  909. From: (blocked)
  910. To: Joe Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  911. Subject: Mail Address
  912. Hi,
  913. Youve given me an address to send you some tapes a while back but I
  914. lost the file. Could you please give that to me again. Terri has
  915. something she'd like to send you. How have you been holding up stress
  916. wise?
  917. Thanks
  918. Mike
  919. ------------------------------
  920. Date: 07 Jan 1997 21:16:15 -0700
  921. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  922. To: (blocked)
  923. Subject: Mail Address
  924. Holding up just fine so far....
  925. Address for me is via the Babylon 5 mail drop, 14431 Ventura
  926. Boulevard, Suite 260, Sherman Oaks, CA 91423.
  927. jms
  928. ------------------------------
  929. Date: 08 Jan 1997 11:24:10 -0700
  930. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  931. To: (blocked)
  932. Subject: The Alliance (UK Con)
  933. One little mistake?! Do you realize that that cat's fur will
  934. probably NEVER grow back?
  935. jms
  936. ------------------------------
  937. Date: 08 Jan 1997 09:23:57 -0700
  938. From: Ronald Legro <75136.2066@compuserve.com>
  939. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  940. Subject: Perfect Beauty Training
  941. > I think it was a more general sense than [Kosh] preparing him
  942. > [Sheridan] specifically for Lorien.
  943. I like that "I think." Suggesting, of course, that the Great Maker can
  944. still be surprised or uncertain regarding his B5 creations.
  945. -- from Milwaukee, Wisconsin USA via Amiga AUTOPILOT v1.80
  946. "Wherever you go...there you go again!" -- Buckaroo Bonzo
  947. ------------------------------
  948. Date: 08 Jan 1997 11:24:11 -0700
  949. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  950. To: Ronald Legro <75136.2066@compuserve.com>
  951. Subject: Perfect Beauty Training
  952. I just report the news, I don't make it.
  953. jms
  954. ------------------------------
  955. Date: 09 Jan 1997 00:40:06 -0700
  956. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  957. To: (blocked)
  958. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  959. Two novels, DEMON NIGHT and OTHERSYDE, an anthology, TALES FROM
  960. THE TWILIGHT ZONE, all out of print, and short stories in AMAZING SF,
  961. PULPHOUSE and others.
  962. jms
  963. ------------------------------
  964. Date: 08 Jan 1997 12:15:49 -0700
  965. From: Douglas Piligian <70760.2440@compuserve.com>
  966. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  967. Subject: ISDN
  968. Joe,
  969. Any luck finding an ISP to use your ISDN modem with?
  970. Doug
  971. ------------------------------
  972. Date: 09 Jan 1997 00:40:08 -0700
  973. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  974. To: Douglas Piligian <70760.2440@compuserve.com>
  975. Subject: ISDN
  976. Haven't really had time to deal with it yet...the show is
  977. keeping me kinda busy lately....
  978. jms
  979. ------------------------------
  980. Date: 08 Jan 1997 23:15:29 -0700
  981. From: Debbie S. Bohdal <105457.2417@compuserve.com>
  982. To: jms <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  983. Subject: B5 CD-ROM?
  984. I was just reading some old posts from you in the Lurker's Guide
  985. about a B5 CD-Rom (from Comton's?) that would be released someday
  986. including some cool features like voice recognition and the ability to
  987. build a small scene using a
  988. set of dailies. Any word on the current status of this project?
  989. If this topic has been beaten to death, I apologize. Just sounded
  990. like a real neat piece of software and I'd like to get more of an
  991. insight on how the creative process works on B5 (including the actual
  992. software you use to do your editing, mixing, etc).
  993. Thanks!
  994. Debbie
  995. ------------------------------
  996. Date: 09 Jan 1997 00:40:09 -0700
  997. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  998. To: Debbie S. Bohdal <105457.2417@compuserve.com>
  999. Subject: B5 CD-ROM?
  1000. That one has been put back, though we're doing a different CD
  1001. rom in house currently.
  1002. jms
  1003. ------------------------------
  1004. Date: 09 Jan 1997 00:44:14 -0700
  1005. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1006. To: (blocked)
  1007. Subject: HELP! HELP!
  1008. Que Queg was the name of one of the characters in MOBY DICK, the
  1009. harpoonist, I believe, from a South Pacific island.
  1010. jms
  1011. ------------------------------
  1012. Date: 09 Jan 1997 05:36:17 -0700
  1013. From: Darran Williams <101656.2143@compuserve.com>
  1014. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1015. Subject: B5 CD-ROM?
  1016. > That one has been put back, though we're doing a different CD rom in
  1017. > house currently.
  1018. jms <<
  1019. Speaking of CD's, does Chris Franke have a definite release date for
  1020. the second music CD yet? I know the Sonic Images web page says January
  1021. but it's January now. Also if there is a release date is it a US only
  1022. date or world-wide. I'm over in the states at the end of the month so
  1023. if it is a US release date I'll have to have a look out for it whilst
  1024. I'm there.
  1025. Thanks in advance..
  1026. Darran...
  1027. ------------------------------
  1028. Date: 09 Jan 1997 12:17:22 -0700
  1029. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1030. To: Darran Williams <101656.2143@compuserve.com>
  1031. Subject: B5 CD-ROM?
  1032. I just got the full soundtrack (58 minutes) yesterday...I'm
  1033. going over it now and making notes and some suggestions. Shouldn't
  1034. take much longer to make the small changes and get this puppy out the
  1035. door.
  1036. jms
  1037. ------------------------------
  1038. Date: 10 Jan 1997 00:46:46 -0700
  1039. From: Debbie S. Bohdal <105457.2417@compuserve.com>
  1040. To: jms <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1041. Subject: Killing Kosh2 etc.
  1042. Hi!
  1043. A couple FTA questions if you have the time:
  1044. During the battle between Sheridans forces and Kosh2, why didnt they
  1045. allow Kosh2 to escape once he broke out of his encounter suit? Were
  1046. they concerned Kosh2 would take them all out before he left? Or were
  1047. they unaware he was trying to make a getaway? Or did Sheridan really
  1048. want to kill him - was that Sheridans ultimate goal or would he have
  1049. been satisfied if Kosh2 left the station when Geribaldi asked him to?
  1050. And why did Kosh2 leave through the ceiling instead of the floor
  1051. (which should be the faster way out right? -- or was he too busy
  1052. fighting with Kosh1 to notice)? How far can a Vorlon travel and how
  1053. long can they stay in space without a ships protection?
  1054. Also - Delenn prizes life. How does she feel about Sheridan murdering
  1055. one of the ambassadors? She seemed to have a sick look on her face
  1056. when she was watching Kosh2 being shot down. Did she support Sheridans
  1057. decision, and will it affect her perception of the man who has returned
  1058. from Zhadum?
  1059. Wow - more questions than I meant to ask And I can think of 100 more,
  1060. but Ill stop bombarding you. I appreciate any insight!
  1061. Thanks!
  1062. Debbie
  1063. ------------------------------
  1064. Date: 10 Jan 1997 15:39:32 -0700
  1065. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1066. To: Debbie S. Bohdal <105457.2417@compuserve.com>
  1067. Subject: Killing Kosh2 etc.
  1068. The idea was to force Kosh2 out of the station, to where it
  1069. could be destroyed outside with a minimum of damage to the station.
  1070. Delenn wasn't happy about it, but also recognizes that war means
  1071. sometimes having to kill somebody.
  1072. jms
  1073. ------------------------------
  1074. Date: 10 Jan 1997 09:52:50 -0700
  1075. From: Hero Games (Sue) <75162.372@compuserve.com>
  1076. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1077. Subject: B-5 RPG
  1078. I've recently heard that the reason we haven't seen the Babylon
  1079. Project from Chameleon Eclectic is because they never received the
  1080. proper permission from you to create it. Is this true or is it hung up
  1081. for the more usual RPG-never-on-schedule reasons?
  1082. If you haven't given permission, is it forthcoming or is the game no
  1083. longer a possibility?
  1084. Thanks for your time.
  1085. Sue
  1086. ------------------------------
  1087. Date: 10 Jan 1997 15:39:33 -0700
  1088. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1089. To: Hero Games (Sue) <75162.372@compuserve.com>
  1090. Subject: B-5 RPG
  1091. No, the game is coming along fine, it has all the proper
  1092. permissions. There have been some delays at my end of things, just
  1093. because there's so much material to review, but what I've seen has been
  1094. terrific. So no, it's definitely coming out, and I think it's great.
  1095. jms
  1096. ------------------------------
  1097. Date: 11 Jan 1997 22:55:55 -0700
  1098. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1099. To: (blocked)
  1100. Subject: How many in a row?
  1101. They'll air 5 through 9 in the next batch.
  1102. jms
  1103. ------------------------------
  1104. Date: 11 Jan 1997 22:55:59 -0700
  1105. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1106. To: (blocked)
  1107. Subject: Killing Kosh2 etc.
  1108. Nope.
  1109. jms
  1110. ------------------------------
  1111. Date: 11 Jan 1997 18:15:09 -0700
  1112. From: Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com>
  1113. To: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1114. Subject: Kosh1 vs. Kosh2
  1115. Joe:
  1116. Some of us were wondering: Did Kosh1 voluntarily participate in the
  1117. fight against Kosh2, or was he just a semi-conscious pawn of
  1118. Sheridan/Lorien?
  1119. Thanks.
  1120. SJE
  1121. ------------------------------
  1122. Date: 11 Jan 1997 22:56:02 -0700
  1123. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1124. To: Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com>
  1125. Subject: Kosh1 vs. Kosh2
  1126. It was conscious, yes.
  1127. jms
  1128. ------------------------------
  1129. Date: 11 Jan 1997 22:56:04 -0700
  1130. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1131. To: (blocked)
  1132. Subject: Kosh1 in charge?
  1133. Yes, he actively participated.
  1134. jms
  1135. ------------------------------
  1136. Date: 10 Jan 1997 23:36:25 -0700
  1137. From: Phyllis Schmulenson <72447.224@compuserve.com>
  1138. To: all
  1139. Subject: Hal
  1140. I'm surprised no one noticed Sunday Jan. 12th 1997 is the day Hal
  1141. became operational in 2001-A space odyssey
  1142. ------------------------------
  1143. Date: 11 Jan 1997 23:06:01 -0700
  1144. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1145. To: Phyllis Schmulenson <72447.224@compuserve.com>
  1146. Subject: Hal
  1147. Well, THAT explains why my computer's been acting funny, now I
  1148. have to warn the world before it cuts me off from th
  1149. ------------------------------
  1150. Date: 11 Jan 1997 13:56:16 -0700
  1151. From: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  1152. To: All
  1153. Subject: Claudia CD?
  1154. Recently saw a graphic image of Claudia Christian on the Web which
  1155. purports to be from her CD. I've never heard of one. Anybody have the
  1156. scoop on this?
  1157. Thanks, John.
  1158. ------------------------------
  1159. Date: 11 Jan 1997 23:06:02 -0700
  1160. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1161. To: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  1162. Subject: Claudia CD?
  1163. Where's the photo located on the web?
  1164. jms
  1165. ------------------------------
  1166. Date: 12 Jan 1997 15:29:53 -0700
  1167. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1168. To: (blocked)
  1169. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1170. (blocked) asks:
  1171. > Does the audience NEED to be as big for a syndicated show
  1172. > compared to a network show in order to survive? I think you
  1173. > mentioned in your "Quick Requests from JMS" message something to
  1174. > the effect B5 has about 10-15 million viewers -- would that be
  1175. > enough to sustain it on one of the big three or even the little
  1176. > two (UPN, WB)?
  1177. It doesn't need to be a BIG audience, but it does need to be big
  1178. enough to make a profit. And that's what they didn't know. Since
  1179. then, they have made a very tidy profit on B5 already.
  1180. jms
  1181. ------------------------------
  1182. Date: 12 Jan 1997 15:41:55 -0700
  1183. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1184. To: (blocked)
  1185. Subject: Killing Kosh2 etc.
  1186. {original post unavailable}
  1187. Had Kosh2 left when asked, it wouldn't have had to be done, no.
  1188. It was vaguely possible, but they had to plan as if he would not do so,
  1189. which in fact was what happened.
  1190. jms
  1191. ------------------------------
  1192. Date: 12 Jan 1997 22:18:14 -0700
  1193. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1194. To: Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com>
  1195. Subject: Betwixt the Betweens
  1196. {original post had no questions}
  1197. Good points.
  1198. jms
  1199. ------------------------------
  1200. Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:41:26 -0700
  1201. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1202. To: Sue Wachowski <74743.3703@compuserve.com>
  1203. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1204. Sue Wachowski <74743.3703@compuserve.com> asks:
  1205. > The whole concept of knowing that the show has a beginning,
  1206. > middle and end, and that's it, makes it more exciting as a
  1207. > viewer...has this ever been done before? I know some shows produce
  1208. > endings when they aren't renewed or are choosing to go off the
  1209. > air, but are there any shows that knew the ending from the
  1210. > beginning<g>? If the spin-offs of B5 aren't done the same way,
  1211. > will there be that same thrill? Will you continue this way of
  1212. > structuring a TV series? I find that I don't watch pointless TV
  1213. > anymore...and if a series has no ending in mind, how can they
  1214. > work towards a goal, except within episodes and scenes? I guess
  1215. > what I want to know is, why hasn't this been done before? Why
  1216. > doesn't TV produce more structured series like this? Will you
  1217. > continue to create shows in this way? A TV novel, is there a term
  1218. > for it? How about *Noveries*?
  1219. > Is this enough of an introduction to myself?
  1220. "Why hasn't this been done before?"
  1221. To which the only answer is...because nobody's done it before.
  1222. (At least, here in the US...in the UK similar things have been done for
  1223. some time, a la The Prisoner.)
  1224. I guess mostly it's because in TV, the question is always "are
  1225. we going to last 9 weeks?" and nobody thinks that far ahead. To set
  1226. things up that you won't pay off for *years* takes someone a little
  1227. insane, a) to believe you'll be on the air that long, and b) to count
  1228. on the audience to be patient enough to wait for things to unfold.
  1229. And over time, I do think you're more likely to see more of
  1230. this sort of thing as B5's impact grows over the coming years.
  1231. My general sense for what comes next for me...assuming the B5
  1232. sequel goes...I've done a hard-linked and extremely intense drama with
  1233. an adventure component...and now, having done that, and proved that it
  1234. *could* be done, despite many who said it couldn't, my feeling now is,
  1235. "Okay, we've done that, how can we tweak it so that the sequel has a
  1236. different feel to it?" So I'm looking at something that's a little more
  1237. in the adventurous mode, with a serious underpinning, with an arc to it
  1238. that's not quite as intense in tone, but is still good drama.
  1239. Characters that grow and change, a definite ending, several mysteries
  1240. enclosed inside other mysteries, with a much larger canvas, and an even
  1241. stronger sense of wonder. B5 I did to prove a point, to some extent;
  1242. now I'd like to try something where, having achieved that, I can sit
  1243. back and, knowing the format now, have some fun with it. Maybe turn
  1244. it on its head in a few places.
  1245. As with everything else I do, I try to find what I'd enjoy as a
  1246. viewer, and take it from there. That was how B5 came about, and that's
  1247. how the new show would come about, should it happen.
  1248. jms
  1249. ------------------------------
  1250. Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:41:28 -0700
  1251. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1252. To: (blocked)
  1253. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1254. (blocked) asks:
  1255. > And, while I've got your ear, what is your opinion on the TV
  1256. > ratings?
  1257. I think we got stuck with a TV 14 rating...and frankly, I think
  1258. the ratings system is massively stupid, and will be broadly ignored.
  1259. jms
  1260. ------------------------------
  1261. Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:41:31 -0700
  1262. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1263. To: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  1264. Subject: Claudia CD?
  1265. {original post had no questions}
  1266. I got it, thanks....
  1267. jms
  1268. ------------------------------
  1269. Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:41:34 -0700
  1270. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1271. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1272. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1273. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1274. > How do they make a profit?
  1275. > From syndication fees?
  1276. > Or is there other evenue streams?
  1277. > And, if I may ask, how do you get paid?
  1278. They get their money from commercial advertising and foreign
  1279. sales. I get a piece of the *net* profit, and since the numbers are
  1280. always jigged so that no TV show or movie ever shows a profit, we know
  1281. how much that will result in...zilch.
  1282. jms
  1283. ------------------------------
  1284. Date: 13 Jan 1997 18:47:22 -0700
  1285. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1286. To: Michael Alessio <71333.714@compuserve.com>
  1287. Subject: Atn: JMS- Story Arc
  1288. {original post had no questions}
  1289. Just one problem: I never SAID "Crusade" would not have a story
  1290. arc. I have only said that it won't be as *intense* an arc as that on
  1291. B5, because the tone is somewhat different, because I don't want to do
  1292. the exact same thing twice. But it will have an arc to it.
  1293. My suggestion: wait until you see what it IS before you ask me
  1294. to make it what it's not.
  1295. jms
  1296. ------------------------------
  1297. Date: 14 Jan 1997 12:45:12 -0700
  1298. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1299. To: SysOp Lee Whiteside <76711.2660@compuserve.com>
  1300. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1301. {original post had no questions}
  1302. Yeah, it did *really* well, and they're aware of that.
  1303. jms
  1304. ------------------------------
  1305. Date: 14 Jan 1997 12:45:13 -0700
  1306. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1307. To: (blocked)
  1308. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1309. {original post unavailable}
  1310. No, that's the standard practice in town. Actors have sued for
  1311. their net of shows that have been in syndication for 25-30 years, and
  1312. been told that it's "still in the red."
  1313. jms
  1314. ------------------------------
  1315. Date: 14 Jan 1997 12:45:15 -0700
  1316. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1317. To: (blocked)
  1318. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1319. {original post unavailable}
  1320. No idea.
  1321. jms
  1322. ------------------------------
  1323. Date: 14 Jan 1997 18:00:45 -0700
  1324. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1325. To: Michael Beemer <71551.1670@compuserve.com>
  1326. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1327. {original post had no questions}
  1328. Here's the insidious part of all this...they say they want a
  1329. ratings system, but of *course* it won't be used for censorship
  1330. purposes, they just want it for informational purposes...and the system
  1331. wasn't even in place for a week before pinheads like Rev. Wildmon were
  1332. out there calling for a boycott of EVERY show rated TV14, on the
  1333. grounds that it shouldn't be on TV. (Leave out the insanity that you
  1334. only have to create a TV15 rating, make all the TV14's another
  1335. category, and suddenly *they're* okay, the same programs would be fine,
  1336. if there were another nastier category.) It's the same thing that
  1337. happened with record ratings, which were instantly used to pressure
  1338. some record stores into not carrying more mature fare.
  1339. It sucks.
  1340. jms
  1341. ------------------------------
  1342. Date: 15 Jan 1997 00:18:38 -0700
  1343. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1344. To: (blocked)
  1345. Subject: B5 in South Africa?
  1346. {original post unavailable}
  1347. I believe it is, yes.
  1348. jms
  1349. ------------------------------
  1350. Date: 15 Jan 1997 00:27:37 -0700
  1351. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1352. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  1353. Subject: Lock and Lie
  1354. Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com> asks:
  1355. > If the Captain felt his ships and people were in danger and fired
  1356. > in perceived self-defense, then why on Earth would he feel the
  1357. > need to lie about it? Did he know that the Minbari were not a
  1358. > threat? If he did, why did he fire on them?
  1359. > Did he learn something between the time of the incident and the
  1360. > lie at the Earth base? Is this something that will be made clearer
  1361. > in the upcoming movie, or is it something you can comment on
  1362. > here?
  1363. The Minbari approached with their gun ports opened...but they
  1364. also hadn't locked on. They were a potential menace, but had not gone
  1365. into the territory of definite menace...and when they fired, it was
  1366. clear from the moment or two it took to respond that the Minbari ships
  1367. weren't ready to attack. So he chose to cover his butt rather than
  1368. take responsibility for screwing up a first contact situation and
  1369. plunging Earth into a war.
  1370. jms
  1371. ------------------------------
  1372. Date: 15 Jan 1997 12:49:26 -0700
  1373. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1374. To: MrsPeel <103112.2040@compuserve.com>
  1375. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1376. {original post had no questions}
  1377. Yup...I agree on about every level.
  1378. jms
  1379. ------------------------------
  1380. Date: 15 Jan 1997 12:49:26 -0700
  1381. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1382. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1383. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1384. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1385. > So I assume that you get paid a salary as well as the
  1386. > (non-existant) net? Is there anyway you can get a better deal?
  1387. Yes, I do get a per-epsode producing fee, and script fees.
  1388. No, no chance of changing the deal, it is what it is...and no,
  1389. I do not personally own B5 in any way, not in copyright, licensing, any
  1390. of that. WB owns all rights.
  1391. jms
  1392. ------------------------------
  1393. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:43 -0700
  1394. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1395. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  1396. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1397. Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com> asks:
  1398. > Joe, If they're out of print, then how might we get them?
  1399. Some libraries and SF oriented bookstores still carry them.
  1400. jms
  1401. ------------------------------
  1402. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:45 -0700
  1403. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1404. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1405. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1406. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1407. > So I take it this is an industry standard set up?
  1408. > So how would you, in the future, get a bigger piece of the pie
  1409. > you've created (such as with Crusades)?
  1410. Yep, that's how they get you, and yes, I hope that the success
  1411. of B5 will allow for a slightly better deal on the new show, though
  1412. again the definition of net profits will almost certainly still be such
  1413. that it adds up to oh...about zip....
  1414. jms
  1415. ------------------------------
  1416. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:48 -0700
  1417. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1418. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1419. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1420. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1421. > So when you pitched it to them and they agreed to make the show,
  1422. > did you get paid for the rights, or do they get the rights in
  1423. > exchange for making the show?
  1424. They get the rights for financing and distributing the show; we
  1425. make the show.
  1426. jms
  1427. ------------------------------
  1428. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:50 -0700
  1429. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1430. To: Sue Wachowski <74743.3703@compuserve.com>
  1431. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1432. Sue Wachowski <74743.3703@compuserve.com> asks:
  1433. > Isn't it also a question of how TV views its audience?
  1434. > What IQ do they assume we all have?
  1435. > What grade level reading do we understand?
  1436. > I guess that's not fair, but how mindless do we want our
  1437. > entertainment to be? Also, what about the TV executives that have
  1438. > to like a show first? Are executives changing?
  1439. > Are their attitudes toward what they like swinging towards TV of
  1440. > a higher level? So, are there things you would change about B5,
  1441. > knowing how it's done? Is it more like, those who grew up on good
  1442. > SF Literature are now in a position to influence the creation of
  1443. > today's SF shows and movies?
  1444. Yes, more writers and folks at the studio/network levels do know
  1445. a little from SF, but not as much as should be. I think that will
  1446. continue to change with time. Now that B5 has broken the strangle hold
  1447. of "no other SF than Star Trek has ever been profitable on TV," I think
  1448. maybe it'll have a positive effect.
  1449. RE: how the networks view viewers...lemme quote something to you
  1450. a suit at one of the networks said: "Our sense is that most of the
  1451. viewers with money or an education have cable, VCRs, laserdisks, and
  1452. they watch those instead of the networks. Our programming more and
  1453. more will have to turn to those who don't have any real education or
  1454. money for other programming options."
  1455. jms
  1456. ------------------------------
  1457. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:53 -0700
  1458. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1459. To: Carl Cantarella <105030.3700@compuserve.com>
  1460. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1461. {original post had no questions}
  1462. Our visibility is increasing, no mistake, but we still haven't
  1463. hit critical mass, and most viewers/reviewers are still largely unaware
  1464. of us. But that's okay, I went into this figuring this would be a long
  1465. haul. Once the show is done, it's done, and nothing will ever change
  1466. that; the only thing that will change is the size of the audience.
  1467. jms
  1468. ------------------------------
  1469. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:55 -0700
  1470. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1471. To: (blocked)
  1472. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1473. (blocked) asks:
  1474. > But you have some kind of influence when it comes to
  1475. > merchandising arrangements, right?
  1476. I have approval over what gets licensed, and the form it takes.
  1477. I work closely with all our licensees.
  1478. jms
  1479. ------------------------------
  1480. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:57 -0700
  1481. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1482. To: Ray Pelzer <70475.1263@compuserve.com>
  1483. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1484. Ray Pelzer <70475.1263@compuserve.com> asks:
  1485. > A piece of the NET profit?
  1486. > Gadzooks, so you and James Garner will be spending a lot of time
  1487. > together at the accountants' offices, eh?
  1488. Bingo.
  1489. jms
  1490. ------------------------------
  1491. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:07:59 -0700
  1492. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1493. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1494. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1495. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1496. > What kind of a show would get a TV-M?
  1497. Apparently, the TV 14 is not a permanent thing...whether this
  1498. changed after we complained, or it was always going to happen, I
  1499. dunno...it'll change from episode to episode. Funny thing is, NObody
  1500. at WB knows who assigned it that rating.
  1501. jms
  1502. ------------------------------
  1503. Date: 16 Jan 1997 02:08:02 -0700
  1504. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1505. To: (blocked)
  1506. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1507. {original post unavailable}
  1508. Just replied on this...it's ep by ep.
  1509. jms
  1510. ------------------------------
  1511. Date: 16 Jan 1997 14:06:27 -0700
  1512. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1513. To: John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com>
  1514. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1515. {original post had no questions}
  1516. Exactly. And of course what they tell the advertisers is
  1517. likely a very different story. I just about fell down when I heard
  1518. this one.
  1519. jms
  1520. ------------------------------
  1521. Date: 16 Jan 1997 22:01:46 -0700
  1522. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1523. To: Michael R. Brehmer <75303.2242@compuserve.com>
  1524. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1525. Michael R. Brehmer <75303.2242@compuserve.com> asks:
  1526. > Do you believe that "network suites" are following that
  1527. > philosophy to a certain degree? Or is that many people's
  1528. > perception that network TV used to be better mere nostalgia? Even
  1529. > with your busy schedule, do you ever get a chance to watch any
  1530. > network TV?
  1531. I don't get much chance to watch TV these days, for obvious
  1532. reasons. I try to carve out room for X-Files, Simpsons, 60 Minutes,
  1533. The Tick, the Larry Sanders Show, Dateline, Nightline and a couple of
  1534. others, but that's about it for the week.
  1535. jms
  1536. ------------------------------
  1537. Date: 16 Jan 1997 22:01:48 -0700
  1538. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1539. To: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  1540. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1541. John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com> asks:
  1542. > I am curious of whether my friend's view is prevalent in the
  1543. > industry, whether it is technically accurate, and whether such a
  1544. > view has hampered (or maybe helped?) to some extent your ability
  1545. > to market B5 accross the country?
  1546. All I know is that in 4 years, I've never heard anyone in the
  1547. industry refer to B5 as a soap. So that may answer your question.
  1548. jms
  1549. ------------------------------
  1550. Date: 16 Jan 1997 22:01:51 -0700
  1551. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1552. To: John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com>
  1553. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1554. John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com> asks:
  1555. > You ever feel that all the networks (and many companies) would
  1556. > run better if they "inverted" the company every once in a while,
  1557. > ie, put the people currently on the front lines in the back
  1558. > office, and vice versa?
  1559. I dunno...sometimes I think that's the *problem*. It used to be
  1560. the case that network suits stayed in one place for a long time, and
  1561. held sway for years...now you've got kids coming in who know nothing
  1562. BUT TV running the show. The median age at the networks is very low
  1563. these days, and the turnover is quite high. The longer you can stay at
  1564. the job (within common sense limits) the more confident you can get and
  1565. start taking some chances (until you get TOO comfortable, natch). Now
  1566. the rule seems to be "cover your ass and don't make trouble" competing
  1567. with "I've gotta do something big to make a splash so I can get a
  1568. better deal with I go to another network."
  1569. Very few people make decisions based on what they think will
  1570. work, it's all based on research now, focus groups and other means of
  1571. being able to point to someone else and say, "I did my job, research
  1572. said it was a good show, it's not my fault."
  1573. Most of the really imaginative work being done in TV these days
  1574. is happening in cable, frankly.
  1575. jms
  1576. ------------------------------
  1577. Date: 16 Jan 1997 22:01:54 -0700
  1578. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1579. To: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  1580. Subject: Sneak Attacks.
  1581. John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com> asks:
  1582. > He accepted an invitation to peace talks, bought just happen to
  1583. > bring along two nuclear missles with him which could not be
  1584. > detected by the enemy (and just why didn't the "Eye" detect his
  1585. > ploy? My problem here is, after such a sneak attack, why do the
  1586. > Minbari still rally around him? Why don't they change his
  1587. > knick-name to "City-Killer" and go off to fight this war the
  1588. > honorable way?
  1589. Well, you're looking at very different scenarios. A "sneak
  1590. attack" a la Pearl Harbor is against a nation that is not at war.
  1591. In the Black Star situation, Sheridan's ship was damaged, and
  1592. they used that to lure in the aggressor ship (which was coming in to
  1593. eliminate them) and destroy it. They were already at war, and they
  1594. were taking drastic steps to keep from being destroyed themselves.
  1595. In the Z'ha'dum situation, again, there was a war of aggression
  1596. on, pursued by the shadows. In wartime, one does sometimes bomb the
  1597. capital cities of aggressor nations, from Iraq to Dresden to Tokyo, on
  1598. and on.
  1599. But neither situation is in the *least* comparable to a sneak
  1600. attack. Was there cleverness? Sure. But sometimes you need that to
  1601. beat a technically superior enemy.
  1602. jms
  1603. ------------------------------
  1604. Date: 17 Jan 1997 15:02:59 -0700
  1605. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1606. To: John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com>
  1607. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1608. John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com> asks:
  1609. > Finally one Viacombot said "Well, how do you know the fans even
  1610. > want an Encyclopedia? Did you do a focus group?"
  1611. > Our producer relpied "How about the 750,000 people who bought the
  1612. > book version?
  1613. Back at you:
  1614. WB did a focus group for B5. Peeled of 20 folks for an in-room
  1615. review, the rest of us watching through mirrored glass. One guy hates
  1616. the show vehemently, keeps saying it's not science fiction. Finally
  1617. the guy running the group says, "Could you tell us what you feel is an
  1618. example of good science fiction?"
  1619. And the guy says, "Power Rangers."
  1620. I damn near went through the glass at him.
  1621. jms
  1622. ------------------------------
  1623. Date: 17 Jan 1997 15:10:44 -0700
  1624. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1625. To: (blocked)
  1626. Subject: Stargazer creditors mtg
  1627. {original post unavailable}
  1628. Btw, could someone over in the UK who knows somebody over at
  1629. the CultTV awards let them know that we still haven't received the
  1630. awards from last year's presentation...and we're building an awards
  1631. cabinet, and they'd look great in it....
  1632. jms
  1633. ------------------------------
  1634. Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:05:14 -0700
  1635. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1636. To: John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com>
  1637. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1638. John Ordover-Trek Editor <72674.1362@compuserve.com> asks:
  1639. > Thing is, they're talking about the -same- book.<G> That ever
  1640. > happen to you on episodes, getting "too thin" from one person and
  1641. > "too fat" from another, when they are talking about the same
  1642. > episode?
  1643. Yeah, that's common...one person wants more EFX, another more
  1644. character, another more arc...and if it doesn't have one of those
  1645. things, that which works for them best, sometimes it gets written off.
  1646. That's one of the things you learn in workshops...that you didn't like
  1647. it doesn't mean it's bad, only that it didn't work for *you*. But on
  1648. many occasions I've seen a note from someone who felt that, because it
  1649. had no CGI in it, it was perforce bad.
  1650. Which is why, in the final analysis, one must listen to the
  1651. small voice in the back of one's head when writing. If networks
  1652. comprise one sort of committee, fandom -- well-intentioned as they all
  1653. are, and as sharp as they all tend to be -- is still another (and
  1654. larger) committee, even more diverse. As you say, there's no one thing
  1655. the fans want...they're not some monolithic group...they're a diverse
  1656. and fasacinating group.
  1657. jms
  1658. ------------------------------
  1659. Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:05:15 -0700
  1660. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1661. To: (blocked)
  1662. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1663. {original post unavailable}
  1664. You never know...it's a mug's game, TeeVee....
  1665. jms
  1666. ------------------------------
  1667. Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:05:16 -0700
  1668. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1669. To: (blocked)
  1670. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1671. {original post unavailable}
  1672. Yeah, it was a good show, wish it were around more.
  1673. jms
  1674. ------------------------------
  1675. Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:05:18 -0700
  1676. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1677. To: Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com>
  1678. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1679. Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com> asks:
  1680. > Just out of curiosity, have you ever seen "Politically Incorrect
  1681. > with Bill Maher?" I know, I know, but what the hey, it nevers
  1682. > hurts to dream, no?
  1683. I have no special urge to see my face on TeeVee, frankly...I'm
  1684. a writer, and happy just with that.
  1685. jms
  1686. ------------------------------
  1687. Date: 18 Jan 1997 01:36:59 -0700
  1688. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1689. To: Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com>
  1690. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1691. Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com> asks:
  1692. > Who does the licencing for B5 novels?
  1693. Dell has thus far licensed the right to do the books; the
  1694. current three books under contract are all filled.
  1695. jms
  1696. ------------------------------
  1697. Date: 18 Jan 1997 01:37:01 -0700
  1698. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1699. To: (blocked)
  1700. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1701. {original post unavailable}
  1702. I think it may have had something to do with the three guys who
  1703. tackled me....
  1704. jms
  1705. ------------------------------
  1706. Date: 18 Jan 1997 01:37:03 -0700
  1707. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1708. To: Tom Knudsen <72347.1626@compuserve.com>
  1709. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1710. Tom Knudsen <72347.1626@compuserve.com> asks:
  1711. > Has there ever, in the history of television that you know of,
  1712. > been a hit show (a big hit, not just a show that stuck around a
  1713. > couple of years) that was instigated/designed based upon this
  1714. > research??
  1715. Not that I know of.
  1716. jms
  1717. ------------------------------
  1718. Date: 18 Jan 1997 01:37:05 -0700
  1719. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1720. To: ben dibble <105430.3170@compuserve.com>
  1721. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1722. ben dibble <105430.3170@compuserve.com> asks:
  1723. > Joe, do you ever wonder if your doing ever so many episodes for
  1724. > B5 is going to make any others following in your footsteps have
  1725. > second thoughts about "the arc thing?"
  1726. I think a *lot* of people wonder about me.
  1727. And it doesn't have to be done by one person; the third year it
  1728. came about because so much was changing, so much was happening, it made
  1729. it hard to bring in anyone...in year four, I've had to structure this
  1730. extremely elaborate tree so I can flip either way depending on whether
  1731. or not we get a fifth year, and again you just can't farm that out in
  1732. any realistic way.
  1733. I'm *very* much looking forward to never, ever doing this
  1734. (writing an entire season or two singlehanded) again for the rest of my
  1735. natural life....
  1736. jms
  1737. ------------------------------
  1738. Date: 18 Jan 1997 01:37:08 -0700
  1739. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1740. To: Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com>
  1741. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1742. Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com> asks:
  1743. > When are new episodes of B5 going to air?
  1744. New eps start around the week of January 27th.
  1745. jms
  1746. ------------------------------
  1747. Date: 18 Jan 1997 20:27:45 -0700
  1748. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1749. To: Richard P. Manny <70762.141@compuserve.com>
  1750. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1751. {original post had no questions}
  1752. Typical...and saddst of all to know that your story is not at
  1753. all uncommon.
  1754. jms
  1755. ------------------------------
  1756. Date: 18 Jan 1997 20:27:47 -0700
  1757. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1758. To: (blocked)
  1759. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1760. {original post unavailable}
  1761. You don't skew the group ahead of time; you get a random sample,
  1762. some who like it, are neutral, or don't like it. That's the public
  1763. opinion measurement biz.
  1764. jms
  1765. ------------------------------
  1766. Date: 18 Jan 1997 20:27:50 -0700
  1767. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1768. To: Richard Wakefield <100534.504@compuserve.com>
  1769. Subject: The Earth-Minbari War
  1770. Richard Wakefield <100534.504@compuserve.com> asks:
  1771. > The E-M war lasted five years (2242-2247 I believe), if the
  1772. > Minbari were so superior technologically why did it take them
  1773. > years to beat us back to Earth ? Will we ever see more info about
  1774. > the war ?
  1775. The 2-hour prequel will get into the question of the war in far
  1776. more detail.
  1777. jms
  1778. ------------------------------
  1779. Date: 18 Jan 1997 20:27:52 -0700
  1780. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1781. To: (blocked)
  1782. Subject: B5 TV ratings?
  1783. {original post unavailable}
  1784. For five weeks.
  1785. jms
  1786. ------------------------------
  1787. Date: 19 Jan 1997 16:05:57 -0700
  1788. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1789. To: (blocked)
  1790. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1791. {original post unavailable}
  1792. No, the figures are correct. DS9 does rate higher than B5,
  1793. though it's lost about 18% of its ratings over the last year, according
  1794. to the trades, while B5 has been gaining over the same period of time.
  1795. Interestingly, on a head-to-head basis with new episodes, we're
  1796. generally only about half a point behind Voyager. DS9 averages a
  1797. couple of points ahead of us.
  1798. BTW, I found out the other day that apparently when Scott Adams
  1799. had done the Dilbert cover story, he'd intended for B5 to get the
  1800. cover, but the folks at TV Guide put Star Trek on at the last minute
  1801. because they felt it would sell more copies.
  1802. jms
  1803. ------------------------------
  1804. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:41 -0700
  1805. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1806. To: (blocked)
  1807. Subject: B5 director
  1808. {original post had no questions}
  1809. Thanks. Mike is one of our core directors; he wasn't available
  1810. to us for the first batch of episodes because another show locked him
  1811. down before we got renewal notice for year 4 (you can't book directors
  1812. if you don't have a commitment), but he's directing one now, and is
  1813. going to do a bunch more. He's a great visual stylist. If I know we're
  1814. going to have him as a director, I'll actually write the script a
  1815. little differently and call for the kinds of visuals I know he can give
  1816. us.
  1817. Funny story...turns out that in Spanish, "vejar" means to abuse,
  1818. degrade and humiliate. So one day, all the crew vanished from the set
  1819. mid-day and reappeared moments later wearing bright red shirts with
  1820. black type reading "I'VE BEEN VEJARED!" They're still very popular.
  1821. jms
  1822. ------------------------------
  1823. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:45 -0700
  1824. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1825. To: Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com>
  1826. Subject: Atn: JMS- Story Arc
  1827. Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com> asks:
  1828. > is Crusade definate?
  1829. Crusade isn't definite yet, we should know soonish, though.
  1830. jms
  1831. ------------------------------
  1832. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:46 -0700
  1833. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1834. To: Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com>
  1835. Subject: ?s of Sordid Biz Nature
  1836. Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com> asks:
  1837. > Does WB tell you if they're promoting B5 at NATPE each year (this
  1838. > year in particular, since the whole 4 or 5 season termination is
  1839. > such a burning question)? If so, do they tell you the results, or
  1840. > do you have to rely on industry jungle-drums to find out how B5
  1841. > fared at NATPE?
  1842. We've never heard squat about NATPE or much of anything else
  1843. over these four years. Also, NATPE is mainly useful for selling new
  1844. shows, not renewing older ones.
  1845. jms
  1846. ------------------------------
  1847. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:48 -0700
  1848. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1849. To: Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com>
  1850. Subject: Opening Credits Season 4
  1851. Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com> asks:
  1852. > Just got around to really trying to breakdown the opening title
  1853. > sequence, haven't been lurking here for a couple of months, don't
  1854. > see any messages, so am curious if this has been "documented" -
  1855. > who says what? Is this right??
  1856. Not quite...rebirth goes to Lyta (since Pat had just had a kid
  1857. recently), and Claudia got the year everything changed, to put her in
  1858. the same grouping with Jerry and Bruce.
  1859. jms
  1860. ------------------------------
  1861. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:50 -0700
  1862. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1863. To: Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com>
  1864. Subject: 3rd Age of Mankind...
  1865. Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com> asks:
  1866. > Or am I completely in left field?
  1867. Sorta kinda...close. You won't have to wait long.
  1868. jms
  1869. ------------------------------
  1870. Date: 19 Jan 1997 21:09:53 -0700
  1871. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1872. To: Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com>
  1873. Subject: Mr. Garibaldi vs. Talia
  1874. {original post had no questions}
  1875. No, the Garibaldi situation doesn't relate to or act as a
  1876. surrogate for that earlier thread.
  1877. jms
  1878. ------------------------------
  1879. Date: 20 Jan 1997 13:57:20 -0700
  1880. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1881. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1882. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1883. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1884. > How do you keep from becoming ensnared in what THEY want the show
  1885. > to be?
  1886. Fortunately, most studios don't know what they want...they only
  1887. get into it if whatever it is, isn't working. B5 is working, so they
  1888. leave it alone. Also, I think they know by now that if a project I care
  1889. about is going to be bastardized...I walk. I've done it many times
  1890. before, and wouldn't hesitate to do it again.
  1891. jms
  1892. ------------------------------
  1893. Date: 20 Jan 1997 13:57:21 -0700
  1894. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1895. To: Hugh Kennedy <70042.710@compuserve.com>
  1896. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1897. Hugh Kennedy <70042.710@compuserve.com> asks:
  1898. > And WB still don't want to release B5 on tape in the US?
  1899. It's got nothing to do with making money...if you look around,
  1900. aside from the cartoon stuff, NO WB series are out on disk or tape,
  1901. because that division prefers to deal with guaranteed big sellers
  1902. (Batman, etc) than with TV, which they feel is kinda below them.
  1903. jms
  1904. ------------------------------
  1905. Date: 20 Jan 1997 13:57:23 -0700
  1906. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1907. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1908. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  1909. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1910. > Do you actually have this entire thing drawn out on paper so to
  1911. > speak?
  1912. I figure they'll probably bury the darned thing with me...and
  1913. I'll still be laying there and revising it....
  1914. jms
  1915. ------------------------------
  1916. Date: 20 Jan 1997 13:57:26 -0700
  1917. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1918. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  1919. Subject: Atn: JMS- Story Arc
  1920. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  1921. > Will we find out about Crusade at the same time as year 5?
  1922. > Or are they under different groups?
  1923. > Are the movies confirmed, and will there be more movies after the
  1924. > 2 by TNT?
  1925. The two TNT movies are confirmed; I imagine I'll hear about the
  1926. sequel before I hear about year 5, but the difference in time will
  1927. probably be only a few weeks.
  1928. jms
  1929. ------------------------------
  1930. Date: 20 Jan 1997 13:57:28 -0700
  1931. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1932. To: JOHN GRAVES <102735.1124@compuserve.com>
  1933. Subject: B5 Audio Problems
  1934. {original post had no questions}
  1935. This is the first I've heard of it, but I've printed your
  1936. message and will give it to George Johnsen tomorrow so he can look into
  1937. it.
  1938. jms
  1939. ------------------------------
  1940. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:28 -0700
  1941. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1942. To: (blocked)
  1943. Subject: Makeup Question
  1944. (blocked) asks:
  1945. > How long does it take Andreas to get made up every day under
  1946. > normal circumstances (excluding the last couple of episodes)? What
  1947. > does he do all that time?
  1948. Last I heard it takes about 2 hours, not too bad, actually.
  1949. jms
  1950. ------------------------------
  1951. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:30 -0700
  1952. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1953. To: Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com>
  1954. Subject: Writing
  1955. Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com> asks:
  1956. > I know that you have the overall arc of the series mapped out,
  1957. > but when you write an individual script, do you follow a
  1958. > "template" of some sort and create the story to fit it, or does
  1959. > the story just spring full-blown into your head, a la Mozart? Do
  1960. > you, for example, decide ahead of time how many scenes there will
  1961. > be and where the characters will be at the end of each? If there
  1962. > is no set method that you use, could you, as a kindness to the
  1963. > adoring masses of lesser mortals, try for a moment to imagine
  1964. > that you are not a genius, and you must write a story from
  1965. > scratch, by lunch, or its no beans for you? What would you start
  1966. > with? Would you begin with a framework/checklist of some sort, or
  1967. > just set a character down and see what he does?
  1968. It's a combination of things, and very hard to explain. I come
  1969. to a given episode knowing I have to do X...X might be "this is the one
  1970. where I have to plant the info about the giant space ferrets," or "this
  1971. is the one where Lennier gets nailed in bed by Londo." Then I kind of
  1972. check in on the characters in my head...I know what they've been going
  1973. through, and I see how they're feeling about it, where they are, what's
  1974. going on...then I sit down and "watch" the events in my head like
  1975. watching a movie, or watching the news. Some scenes are vaguer than
  1976. others, so I keep replaying it in my head until I can see the whole
  1977. thing...then I write it all down.
  1978. In the latter case you mention, having nothing, and being under
  1979. the gun, I always, *always* start with character rather than a series
  1980. of incidents or plot points. Because character is the key to
  1981. everything: plot, structure, all of it. All you need to know is who
  1982. your character is, what he wants, how far he will go to get it, and how
  1983. far somebody else will go to stop him. The rest follows naturally.
  1984. jms
  1985. ------------------------------
  1986. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:32 -0700
  1987. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1988. To: (blocked)
  1989. Subject: Kevin Dobson
  1990. (blocked) asks:
  1991. > Is this the actor Kevin Dobson of Kojak, Knotts Landing fame and
  1992. > currently F/X The series?
  1993. Same name, different person.
  1994. jms
  1995. ------------------------------
  1996. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:35 -0700
  1997. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  1998. To: (blocked)
  1999. Subject: Bester
  2000. (blocked) asks:
  2001. > When's the next Bester episode?
  2002. 407, "Epiphanies."
  2003. jms
  2004. ------------------------------
  2005. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:38 -0700
  2006. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2007. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2008. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2009. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  2010. > So how big is this thing?
  2011. > And what do you put on it?
  2012. It's about as big as my life these days....
  2013. jms
  2014. ------------------------------
  2015. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:42 -0700
  2016. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2017. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2018. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2019. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  2020. > But would most studios care in other situations?
  2021. > Where else have you walked from?
  2022. > And, if I may ask, why do you do all of this (make the show, talk
  2023. > with us, deal with the studio, etc)?
  2024. I walked off THE REAL GHOSTBUSTERS when they decided to soften
  2025. the characters and turn Janine into a mommy figure, off CAPTAIN POWER
  2026. when they decided to give the sponsor (Mattel) more control over
  2027. stories...and others.
  2028. Why do I stay on the nets? I was here before B5, and I'll be
  2029. here after, to one degree or another. I see no reason to change.
  2030. jms
  2031. ------------------------------
  2032. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:44 -0700
  2033. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2034. To: MrsPeel <103112.2040@compuserve.com>
  2035. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2036. MrsPeel <103112.2040@compuserve.com> asks:
  2037. > Someone in Hollywood with artistic integrity?
  2038. There are lots of folks out here with integrity; they're just
  2039. not as colorful to write about, and they don't fit in with accepted
  2040. cliche.
  2041. Mainly, I'm genetically a pain in the butt.
  2042. jms
  2043. ------------------------------
  2044. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:47 -0700
  2045. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2046. To: (blocked)
  2047. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2048. (blocked) asks:
  2049. > Is your life natural?
  2050. You can never burn out as long as you're doing what you enjoy.
  2051. When it stops being fun, then you burn out. And I'm still having fun.
  2052. jms
  2053. ------------------------------
  2054. Date: 21 Jan 1997 13:46:49 -0700
  2055. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2056. To: (blocked)
  2057. Subject: B4 & After
  2058. {original post unavailable}
  2059. You misremember. The whole point of going back was to make
  2060. sure the last war was won, so that the shadow fleet would have *fewer*
  2061. ships coming up to the present, not to get more ships for our side.
  2062. jms
  2063. ------------------------------
  2064. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:49:56 -0700
  2065. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2066. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2067. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2068. {original post had no questions}
  2069. "So in other words, you like it here (the Nets) and you do what you do
  2070. (make great stories) because you're having fun, and you don't
  2071. compromise on principle. That must be hard in the town you're in."
  2072. Not really. Not as long as you know what you're in the business
  2073. for. I'm a storyteller. The rest is superfluous. And it's not really
  2074. that hard because I live a sensible life...if they take it all away, I
  2075. should still be okay, and I can go back to writing books, or teaching.
  2076. A story is a story, doesn't matter to me which venue it is. Where this
  2077. town gets you is if you're in it for the money. Money's nice, but
  2078. doesn't really mean that much to me...you can only sleep in one bed at
  2079. a time, drive one car at a time, eat one meal at a time...how much do
  2080. you *need*?
  2081. "Joe, you are a truly remarkable man, much like the ancient Bards of
  2082. old. In my humble opinion, you are Shakespere and Homer wrapped up in
  2083. one."
  2084. Not a chance. If I work hard and write my brains out, then in
  2085. 20 years *maybe* I'll be fit to carry their pencil cases, but no more
  2086. than that.
  2087. jms
  2088. ------------------------------
  2089. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:50:00 -0700
  2090. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2091. To: John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com>
  2092. Subject: Sneak Attacks.
  2093. John M. Graham <74166.3727@compuserve.com> asks:
  2094. > Was there cleverness?
  2095. > Again I ask, why do they follow him still?
  2096. I think the main reason the Minbari have a problem with the
  2097. Black Star incident is mainly because it happened to *them*. And even
  2098. there it's mainly the warrior caste that's annoyed by it...even though
  2099. they were en route to doing something just as reprehensible, the
  2100. equivilent to strafing lifeboats in WW2. Frankly, I don't think the
  2101. warrior caste would give a fig who else it happened to...they're
  2102. outraged because it happened to *them*.
  2103. jms
  2104. ------------------------------
  2105. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:50:02 -0700
  2106. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2107. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  2108. Subject: Another John?
  2109. Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com> asks:
  2110. > I don't know what you think of the man, but have you heard that
  2111. > John Rhys-Davies is available? Do you prefer them over
  2112. > contemporary? TVG: What science-fiction novels have you enjoyed?
  2113. > Would you sign up if the opportunity presented itself?
  2114. > Wouldn't you?
  2115. Hmmm...interesting....
  2116. jms
  2117. ------------------------------
  2118. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:50:04 -0700
  2119. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2120. To: SysOp Mike Willmoth <76170.1037@compuserve.com>
  2121. Subject: Writing
  2122. {original post had no questions}
  2123. Twain was the same way; he said, "You should never start writing
  2124. a work until you have finished it to your satisfaction."
  2125. jms
  2126. ------------------------------
  2127. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:50:07 -0700
  2128. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2129. To: Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com>
  2130. Subject: Writing
  2131. Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com> asks:
  2132. > Is this cerebral cineplexing a learnable skill, and if so do you
  2133. > have any suggestions as to how to learn it?
  2134. I dunno...I've always been this way, seeing it in my head.
  2135. Helps to have been a solitary-minded kid, I suppose, always off by
  2136. myself. When I first began to read novels, I saw them in my head in
  2137. full technicolor with surround sound. Especially with Bradbury's
  2138. stuff, which is full of imagery; I can still summon up my mind's eye
  2139. view of Usher 2, the Martian deserts with their silver windsailing
  2140. vessels, the race for the ship in "The Golden Apples of the Sun"...it's
  2141. the way I'm hardwired.
  2142. Which is why my scripts for B5 (and most shows) are *very*
  2143. detailed; I don't just write action and dialogue, I go shot-by-shot,
  2144. close-ups, fades, juxtaposition of shots, lighting, sound, framing of
  2145. actors, all of it, to try and most precisely recreate the script (and
  2146. the episode) to look like what I saw in my head.
  2147. jms
  2148. ------------------------------
  2149. Date: 22 Jan 1997 01:50:10 -0700
  2150. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2151. To: Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com>
  2152. Subject: Yr. 4/5
  2153. Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com> asks:
  2154. > How does the process work in choosing a director?
  2155. > Do you have input and/or final say?
  2156. > Just out of curiosity have you ever considered Jonathan Frakes?
  2157. Given that Paramount already pressured one director associated
  2158. with ST not to work with us, I'd rather not take that chance again.
  2159. We choose directors based on prior work, a demo reel of their
  2160. stuff, a personal meeting, and gut instinct. They have to understand
  2161. that the job is to service the text, not to rewrite or change. We look
  2162. for directors whose work shows a great visual style, and who are
  2163. willing to take chances. We get some directors who come to us because
  2164. they can't do the kinds of things they want to do for any other show.
  2165. Here, we *encourage* them to experiment. The worst that'll happen is
  2166. that it'll fall short. Big deal. If you succeed, it's brilliant.
  2167. jms
  2168. ------------------------------
  2169. Date: 22 Jan 1997 13:25:18 -0700
  2170. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2171. To: (blocked)
  2172. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2173. {original post unavailable}
  2174. The amazing thing about TV Guide is that here we are, doing
  2175. this show for 4 years, with 2 Emmy awards, a Hugo award, a bunch of
  2176. other awards, the fifth highest rated syndicated drama series...and in
  2177. those 4 years we have never, ever had a B5 cover on TV Guide.
  2178. jms
  2179. ------------------------------
  2180. Date: 22 Jan 1997 13:32:13 -0700
  2181. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2182. To: MONICA FLYNN <101771.3174@compuserve.com>
  2183. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2184. {original post had no questions}
  2185. So, like, you're saying I should stay away from boats....
  2186. jms
  2187. ------------------------------
  2188. Date: 22 Jan 1997 13:32:14 -0700
  2189. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2190. To: Mark Sloan <100407.3462@compuserve.com>
  2191. Subject: SFX Readers Awards
  2192. {original post had no questions}
  2193. That's great news, thanks.
  2194. jms
  2195. ------------------------------
  2196. Date: 22 Jan 1997 13:32:15 -0700
  2197. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2198. To: MrsPeel <103112.2040@compuserve.com>
  2199. Subject: Writing
  2200. MrsPeel <103112.2040@compuserve.com> asks:
  2201. > The next time I went in to pitch, I purposely structured my ideas
  2202. > around the thought, What do we need to say about the characters?
  2203. And therein, I think, lay the problem....
  2204. jms
  2205. ------------------------------
  2206. Date: 23 Jan 1997 01:29:06 -0700
  2207. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2208. To: (blocked)
  2209. Subject: Another John?
  2210. [Reply to message #640368, which is no longer available]
  2211. More than I can tell you, I would *love* to do a film or
  2212. miniseries version of "Canticle." I *love* that book.
  2213. jms
  2214. ------------------------------
  2215. Date: 23 Jan 1997 01:46:50 -0700
  2216. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2217. To: John F Davis <73455.43@compuserve.com>
  2218. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2219. {original post had no questions}
  2220. My credits list is very long and very dull and very boring...can
  2221. there be anything less interesting than somebody reciting their work
  2222. history?
  2223. jms
  2224. ------------------------------
  2225. Date: 23 Jan 1997 01:46:52 -0700
  2226. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2227. To: (blocked)
  2228. Subject: Writing
  2229. (blocked) asks:
  2230. > Are you a fan of his?
  2231. Yeah, I've always enjoyed Bradbury's work, though more the
  2232. earlier stuff than the later stuff.
  2233. jms
  2234. ------------------------------
  2235. Date: 23 Jan 1997 01:46:53 -0700
  2236. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2237. To: (blocked)
  2238. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2239. {original post unavailable}
  2240. It's the same we've had from the start. Some say yes, some say
  2241. no, and the press usually reports the no's because they're more
  2242. interesting than the yes's.
  2243. jms
  2244. ------------------------------
  2245. Date: 23 Jan 1997 01:46:57 -0700
  2246. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2247. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  2248. Subject: No Surrender!
  2249. Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com> asks:
  2250. > Care to comment?
  2251. Not really.
  2252. jms
  2253. ------------------------------
  2254. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:09:32 -0700
  2255. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2256. To: Ed Brandt <100274.2672@compuserve.com>
  2257. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2258. Ed Brandt <100274.2672@compuserve.com> asks:
  2259. > True or false?
  2260. 3 to four OTHER spinoffs?!
  2261. The thud you just heard was me fainting.
  2262. No...definitely not the case. Yikes....
  2263. jms
  2264. ------------------------------
  2265. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:09:34 -0700
  2266. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2267. To: (blocked)
  2268. Subject: Another John?
  2269. (blocked) asks:
  2270. > Is it a possibility?
  2271. > Did anyone ever buy the dramatization rights?
  2272. Given that it's a seminal work of SF, I'm sure *somebody* must
  2273. have the rights....
  2274. jms
  2275. ------------------------------
  2276. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:09:36 -0700
  2277. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2278. To: (blocked)
  2279. Subject: Another John?
  2280. (blocked) asks:
  2281. > Did you ever hear the NPR radio dramatization?
  2282. I caught bits and pieces of it...what I heard, I liked.
  2283. jms
  2284. ------------------------------
  2285. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:09:38 -0700
  2286. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2287. To: (blocked)
  2288. Subject: Too Much Success?
  2289. {original post unavailable}
  2290. Yeah, the sequel and the fifth year could conceivably happen at
  2291. the same time...or not...or one or the other...it's utterly in flux.
  2292. Totally fluxed up.
  2293. jms
  2294. ------------------------------
  2295. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:09:40 -0700
  2296. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2297. To: (blocked)
  2298. Subject: "Lensman" Series
  2299. {original post unavailable}
  2300. Actually, they're written in order, and whoever you're buying
  2301. them from will likely have that information, or they'll be released
  2302. that way. From memory, I don't have them in front of me, it goes from
  2303. Triplanetary to Lensman, Second Stage Lensman, Grey Lensman and
  2304. Children of the Lens...I think that's right....
  2305. jms
  2306. ------------------------------
  2307. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:16:28 -0700
  2308. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2309. To: John F Davis <73455.43@compuserve.com>
  2310. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2311. {original post had no questions}
  2312. If it's just shows, then there's also He-Man, She-Ra, Jayce and
  2313. the Wheeled Warriors, Real Ghostbusters (animation all)...then the live
  2314. stuff with Captain Power, the new Twilight Zone, Murder She Wrote,
  2315. Nightmare Classics, Jake and the Fatman, Walker Texas Ranger and B5.
  2316. jms
  2317. ------------------------------
  2318. Date: 23 Jan 1997 22:16:29 -0700
  2319. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2320. To: Stuart C. Hellinger <70402.1371@compuserve.com>
  2321. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2322. Stuart C. Hellinger <70402.1371@compuserve.com> asks:
  2323. > Oh, btw, will TNT also show the "The Gathering"?
  2324. Yes, TNT will show the pilot movie. The theory is to do the
  2325. prequel first, then the pilot, then the series through one run at
  2326. least, then the second original TV movie to freshen the cycle, then
  2327. onward.
  2328. jms
  2329. ------------------------------
  2330. Date: 24 Jan 1997 13:31:58 -0700
  2331. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2332. To: (blocked)
  2333. Subject: Another John?
  2334. {original post unavailable}
  2335. The deal is that what makes for a great novel is not what makes
  2336. for a great movie in most cases; novels are internal, movies are
  2337. external. And often execs hear about a big SF book, they don't know
  2338. anything about it except that it's popular or famous, and they option
  2339. it...then find out what it is and have no idea how to make it...or what
  2340. it was...or why it works... and after buying it for what it *is* they
  2341. try to make it into something it's *not* because they're more
  2342. comfortable wit what it isn't but could be than what it is and can't
  2343. be.
  2344. And the fact that I actually understood what I wrote and was
  2345. entirely serious in it suddenly tells me that I've been in this town
  2346. WAY too long.
  2347. jms
  2348. ------------------------------
  2349. Date: 24 Jan 1997 13:31:59 -0700
  2350. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2351. To: Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com>
  2352. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2353. Brent Barrett <75063.3305@compuserve.com> asks:
  2354. > Had you or anyone else thought about getting TNT to fund the re-
  2355. > editing of that movie the way you originally wanted it?
  2356. We've talked with them about it, and there's still nothing set
  2357. yet. We think we may be able to get this reworked to some extent, at
  2358. least re-edited, with some new CG, but it isn't final yet.
  2359. jms
  2360. ------------------------------
  2361. Date: 24 Jan 1997 22:52:18 -0700
  2362. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2363. To: (blocked)
  2364. Subject: Mug Rug
  2365. {original post had no questions}
  2366. It just came in today (well, I just got it today from the mail
  2367. drop, nominally the same thing)...looks great, and it'll look great on
  2368. my office desk at the studio. Tell her thanks for me, it's nifty.
  2369. jms
  2370. ------------------------------
  2371. Date: 24 Jan 1997 22:52:19 -0700
  2372. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2373. To: (blocked)
  2374. Subject: fave books ?
  2375. (blocked) asks:
  2376. > So what are your favorite sf books ?
  2377. > Who are your favorite writers ?
  2378. I'm somewhat a traditionlalist in my SF/fantasy
  2379. reading...Bradbury, Clarke, Asimov, Ellison, Russell, Smith (EE and
  2380. Clark Ashton), Lovecraft, others. I've fallen a bit astray of the
  2381. newer folks, though I never miss an opportunity to plug Jonathan
  2382. Carroll's work.
  2383. jms
  2384. ------------------------------
  2385. Date: 26 Jan 1997 00:44:18 -0700
  2386. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2387. To: (blocked)
  2388. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2389. {original post had no questions}
  2390. "Less than unbiased" didn't even BEGIN to cover it.
  2391. jms
  2392. ------------------------------
  2393. Date: 26 Jan 1997 00:54:20 -0700
  2394. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2395. To: Meryl Yourish <103470.2703@compuserve.com>
  2396. Subject: Changes
  2397. Meryl Yourish <103470.2703@compuserve.com> asks:
  2398. > How has B5 changed me?
  2399. Re: "Never eat anything bigger than your head"...that goes back
  2400. a long ways. It's part of a litany of country-wisdom stuff that has a
  2401. long history. I think the first part of it is, "Never eat anything
  2402. bigger than your head, never eat at a place called Pop's, never shoot
  2403. pool at a place called Mom's, the difference between horses and people
  2404. is that they're too smart to bet on what we'll do, and a fool and his
  2405. money were lucky to get together in the first place." I like that last
  2406. one particularly.
  2407. jms
  2408. ------------------------------
  2409. Date: 26 Jan 1997 00:54:21 -0700
  2410. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2411. To: (blocked)
  2412. Subject: B5 CD #2 is Available!
  2413. {original post unavailable}
  2414. So what do you think? I've listened to it about five times now,
  2415. counting the two times prior to approval, and I like it a lot.
  2416. Here's the interesting thing, and it shows how sometimes you can
  2417. never quite shake the fanboy aspect in your (my) perceptions. When I
  2418. first listened to the CD, and I spoke to Chris, I gave him a series of
  2419. notes, based on how much I liked the first CD, to make it more in
  2420. keeping with that.
  2421. I went on at this for some time, and Christopher pointed out
  2422. that it was obvious I liked the first one...but that if he went along
  2423. with what I was saying, it would make the second soundtrack just like
  2424. the first one...in which case, why make it? Which was just what I'd
  2425. been saying about wanting to do the sequel series, if it's picked up,
  2426. in a different way.
  2427. We all come to like something a certain way, and want the next
  2428. one to be just like the *last* one. And I realized that he was utterly
  2429. correct, and I let it go through without changes, trusting to his
  2430. creative instincts.
  2431. After the finished CD came in, I listened to it again at the
  2432. office, and called Chris. "I'm glad you stuck to your guns," I told
  2433. him. "You were right and I was wrong."
  2434. Which is the other good thing about B5...nobody here is afraid
  2435. to argue with me if they think they're right. I expect nothing less.
  2436. jms
  2437. ------------------------------
  2438. Date: 26 Jan 1997 00:54:24 -0700
  2439. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2440. To: Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com>
  2441. Subject: JMS' scriptwriting book
  2442. Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com> asks:
  2443. > Pathetic, really, isn't it?
  2444. "no animals were harmed during the typing of this message."
  2445. I would've believed this until a petition signed by 47 ferrets,
  2446. ducks and hamsters arrived on my desk a few minutes ago....
  2447. jms
  2448. ------------------------------
  2449. Date: 26 Jan 1997 18:36:16 -0700
  2450. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2451. To: Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com>
  2452. Subject: From jms re: yr 4/5
  2453. Sanjiv S. Purba <102735.1770@compuserve.com> asks:
  2454. > How does one get to bid on a book contract that needs to be
  2455. > filled? Is it possible to submit a book proposal?
  2456. > How do you submit ideas for other types of licences?
  2457. You need to write an outline and submit it, though lately we've
  2458. been assigning books to published authors based on a premise from
  2459. in-house. You can't just submit ideas for licenses...a company has to
  2460. approach WB with an offer and a business plan.
  2461. jms
  2462. ------------------------------
  2463. Date: 27 Jan 1997 03:41:46 -0700
  2464. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2465. To: Rebecca Eschliman <76072.2345@compuserve.com>
  2466. Subject: JMS' scriptwriting book
  2467. {original post had no questions}
  2468. "They were forced to sign the petition by a terrorist group of
  2469. meerkats, kinkajous and bandicoots"
  2470. Oh...*them* again....
  2471. Same old story.
  2472. jms
  2473. ------------------------------
  2474. Date: 27 Jan 1997 14:26:50 -0700
  2475. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2476. To: (blocked)
  2477. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2478. {original post unavailable}
  2479. TNT will begin showing B5 after it's finished.
  2480. Crusade is in development, and will take place within the B5
  2481. universe, but with a distinctly different plot.
  2482. jms
  2483. ------------------------------
  2484. Date: 27 Jan 1997 14:26:51 -0700
  2485. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2486. To: David Cerreta <72630.3433@compuserve.com>
  2487. Subject: The Long Night
  2488. David Cerreta <72630.3433@compuserve.com> asks:
  2489. > How many could say that now?
  2490. Thanks...and yeah, lots of folks were eager to write off Vir at
  2491. the start. I think they've all changed their minds by now.
  2492. jms
  2493. ------------------------------
  2494. Date: 27 Jan 1997 14:26:52 -0700
  2495. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2496. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2497. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2498. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  2499. > Do you have all the scenes you shot for the piolit on disk
  2500. > somehwere? One other thing I just thought of, how long do you keep
  2501. > the shots from the episodes on disk?
  2502. We don't keep them on disk after we finish editing; in the case
  2503. of the pilot we're redigitizing dailies to go in and make our changes.
  2504. jms
  2505. ------------------------------
  2506. Date: 27 Jan 1997 14:26:53 -0700
  2507. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2508. To: (blocked)
  2509. Subject: What's the word?
  2510. (blocked) asks:
  2511. > Does he have good information, or can I write them a nasty letter
  2512. > for making me panic?
  2513. Not having been told this myself, I can only say I'll have to
  2514. check it out.
  2515. jms
  2516. ------------------------------
  2517. Date: 27 Jan 1997 14:26:54 -0700
  2518. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2519. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2520. Subject: JMS' scriptwriting book
  2521. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  2522. > Why is it everyone around here thinks you don't like cute?
  2523. > Is there some comment that you made regarding "cute fuzzy
  2524. > things"??
  2525. Ah hates cute....
  2526. jms
  2527. ------------------------------
  2528. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:54:55 -0700
  2529. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2530. To: Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com>
  2531. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2532. Scott Baker <76072.1744@compuserve.com> asks:
  2533. > Correct me if I'm wrong, but everything you shoot is stored
  2534. > digitally for final mixing and the CGI effects to be added,
  2535. > right? So, what are dailies and how are the stored?
  2536. > And what happens to the data after the episode is sent off?
  2537. Dailies are the actual film, developed overnight and
  2538. transferred to video. The videotapes are then digitized, and dropped
  2539. into the editing machines. Once editing is finished, the main disks
  2540. containing the digitized dailies are wiped; we only keep the list of
  2541. shots and frame counts for the supercomputer to use in assembling the
  2542. film.
  2543. jms
  2544. ------------------------------
  2545. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:54:56 -0700
  2546. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2547. To: Kathy Sheldrake <76236.254@compuserve.com>
  2548. Subject: Changes
  2549. {original post had no questions}
  2550. Yeah, it goes way back.
  2551. jms
  2552. ------------------------------
  2553. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:54:58 -0700
  2554. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2555. To: SysOp Lee Whiteside <76711.2660@compuserve.com>
  2556. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2557. SysOp Lee Whiteside <76711.2660@compuserve.com> asks:
  2558. > Does that mean you are definitely rediting the pilot or that's
  2559. > what you'll do if you get the go-ahead?
  2560. We've got a definite maybe, but we can't wait until the last
  2561. moment to begin digitizing stuff.
  2562. jms
  2563. ------------------------------
  2564. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:55:00 -0700
  2565. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2566. To: T.P. Chai <104674.3064@compuserve.com>
  2567. Subject: >>the Long Night<<
  2568. T.P. Chai <104674.3064@compuserve.com> asks:
  2569. > What I'm wondering is, the dialogue about Vir being "harmless",
  2570. > was that written before or after you realized what should happen?
  2571. > In general, do you go through a lot of drafts and
  2572. > insertion/deletion?
  2573. No, I usually go through only a couple of drafts. The line
  2574. about Vir seemed correct regardless.
  2575. jms
  2576. ------------------------------
  2577. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:55:02 -0700
  2578. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2579. To: (blocked)
  2580. Subject: The Long Night
  2581. {original post had no questions}
  2582. Thanks. The White Star mission in that ep has definite roots;
  2583. during WW2 to convince the Germans we weren't going to land at
  2584. Normandy, our own agents were fed incorrect information, set
  2585. loose...and then info was leaked to the Germans allowing them to pick
  2586. up the agents and torture the information out of them. This wasn't
  2587. quite as bad as that, the crew at least knew what they were getting
  2588. into...but there are often no good choices in war.
  2589. jms
  2590. ------------------------------
  2591. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:55:05 -0700
  2592. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2593. To: Vadim Naroditsky <72133.1175@compuserve.com>
  2594. Subject: Press and Year 5
  2595. Vadim Naroditsky <72133.1175@compuserve.com> asks:
  2596. > Does that mean UPN will not be showing reruns?
  2597. UPN has nothing to do with B5.
  2598. jms
  2599. ------------------------------
  2600. Date: 28 Jan 1997 11:55:07 -0700
  2601. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2602. To: JOHN GRAVES <102735.1124@compuserve.com>
  2603. Subject: Season 5 Cancelled?
  2604. JOHN GRAVES <102735.1124@compuserve.com> asks:
  2605. > Any comments?
  2606. If I had anything to say on this, I would've said it. All I
  2607. know is that this exact thing has happened before in previous seasons.
  2608. jms
  2609. ------------------------------
  2610. Date: 28 Jan 1997 17:05:02 -0700
  2611. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2612. To: Ruth Spradlin <73477.3155@compuserve.com>
  2613. Subject: Scott Adams cameo
  2614. Ruth Spradlin <73477.3155@compuserve.com> asks:
  2615. > So -- what the hey?
  2616. Nope, it'll be as a human. It's a small role but should be
  2617. good for Dilbert fans.
  2618. jms
  2619. ------------------------------
  2620. Date: 28 Jan 1997 17:09:10 -0700
  2621. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2622. To: (blocked)
  2623. Subject: New episode...
  2624. {original post had no questions}
  2625. Two things....
  2626. The episode that preceded "The Long Night" aired last
  2627. week...and bear in mind that Cartagia has never been shown to be
  2628. weak...he's young, and Londo ain't...he takes pride in being a lady's
  2629. man, so given that he got behind Londo, a weak position for anyone,
  2630. it's very reasonable.
  2631. jms
  2632. ------------------------------
  2633. Date: 28 Jan 1997 17:09:11 -0700
  2634. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2635. To: matt greenslade <111111.1445@compuserve.com>
  2636. Subject: Mr Garibaldi
  2637. matt greenslade <111111.1445@compuserve.com> asks:
  2638. > Can anyone answer why Garibaldi has a security level of
  2639. > 'Ultraviolet Alpha' (presumably high) and yet in the same
  2640. > conversation last series reveals that he has been dismissed from
  2641. > his last four jobs? I mean is he a hacker, a liar or a very lucky
  2642. > guy?
  2643. He got his clearance when he came onto B5, after Sinclair
  2644. fought to get him the job. And that clearance mainly pertains to B5
  2645. stuff.
  2646. jms
  2647. ------------------------------
  2648. Date: 28 Jan 1997 22:13:08 -0700
  2649. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2650. To: (blocked)
  2651. Subject: B5 cancelled?
  2652. {original post unavailable}
  2653. Nothing is known for certain yet.
  2654. jms
  2655. ------------------------------
  2656. Date: 28 Jan 1997 22:13:10 -0700
  2657. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2658. To: (blocked)
  2659. Subject: The Long Night
  2660. {original post unavailable}
  2661. No, this was always G'Kar's path.
  2662. I think it also showed the League that he was willing to
  2663. sacrifice his own people, that he *means business*...and is prepared to
  2664. go all the way for this, and they'd damned well better be as well.
  2665. jms
  2666. ------------------------------
  2667. Date: 29 Jan 1997 03:54:46 -0700
  2668. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2669. To: (blocked)
  2670. Subject: New episode...
  2671. (blocked) asks:
  2672. > While I've got your attention, any new word on renewal for season
  2673. > 5?
  2674. No word yet.
  2675. jms
  2676. ------------------------------
  2677. Date: 29 Jan 1997 11:54:08 -0700
  2678. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2679. To: Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com>
  2680. Subject: Scott Adams cameo
  2681. Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com> asks:
  2682. > For those of us with friends and aquaintances who are Dilbert
  2683. > fans and occasional B5 watchers, can you tell us which episode
  2684. > Adams will appear in?
  2685. I seem to remember dropping his cameo into "Moments of
  2686. Transition."
  2687. jms
  2688. ------------------------------
  2689. Date: 29 Jan 1997 11:54:09 -0700
  2690. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2691. To: Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com>
  2692. Subject: New episode...
  2693. Scott J. Epstein <71514.2733@compuserve.com> asks:
  2694. > I'm thinking of the scene when Cartagia (with his hands covered
  2695. > with G'Kar's blood) finds Londo and Vir in the garden, and says
  2696. > to Vir, "What are *you* doing here?"
  2697. Who knows, sometimes the characters know more about this stuff
  2698. to come than I do....
  2699. jms
  2700. ------------------------------
  2701. Date: 29 Jan 1997 22:44:55 -0700
  2702. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2703. To: (blocked)
  2704. Subject: NATPE & Rumors
  2705. (blocked) asks:
  2706. > Is it possible that somebody sold you a bill of goods about the
  2707. > value of going to NATPE? Would B5 have fared better if people had
  2708. > been pushing it at these industry shindigs? Do you have someone in
  2709. > WB Domestic TV seriouly honked off at you? Or is someone trying to
  2710. > generate support, using reverse psychology, by floating a
  2711. > cancellation rumor, so the loyal fans will rise into a collective
  2712. > high hover and start yet another letter writing campaign, to
  2713. > "rescue" the show?
  2714. I understand...thing is, people carried back the same reports
  2715. from the same NATPE convention *last* year...so where does one start?
  2716. jms
  2717. ------------------------------
  2718. Date: 29 Jan 1997 22:44:56 -0700
  2719. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2720. To: Michael Beemer <71551.1670@compuserve.com>
  2721. Subject: Harlan on 'PI'
  2722. {original post had no questions}
  2723. Yeah,I was astounded myself. Neither he nor Star Parker knew a
  2724. thing about what the Blacklist was really about...I think if you're
  2725. going to do a show like that, you should do your homework.
  2726. jms
  2727. ------------------------------
  2728. Date: 29 Jan 1997 22:44:58 -0700
  2729. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2730. To: Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com>
  2731. Subject: Harlan
  2732. Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com> asks:
  2733. > Is that a good thing or a bad thing do you suppose?
  2734. > Is it true that you and he will be at Icon in New York early
  2735. > April?
  2736. Yeah, we'll both definitely be at ICON.
  2737. jms
  2738. ------------------------------
  2739. Date: 29 Jan 1997 22:45:00 -0700
  2740. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2741. To: (blocked)
  2742. Subject: The Long Night
  2743. {original post unavailable}
  2744. It was gonna be Londo right up until 2 pages before the
  2745. scene...then Vir said, "Nope."
  2746. jms
  2747. ------------------------------
  2748. Date: 29 Jan 1997 22:45:04 -0700
  2749. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2750. To: Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com>
  2751. Subject: The Long Night
  2752. Roseann M. Caputo <103510.1542@compuserve.com> asks:
  2753. > The whole scene with G'Kar and the other Narn and then to have
  2754. > them ask, what did he endure????? And Vir, I didn't even see that
  2755. > coming? Did he?
  2756. > When you write, does it ever feel like that there's this person
  2757. > inside your head who keeps bugging you to tell a story about
  2758. > them, or do I need that vacation more than I know??? Do you have a
  2759. > lute at home?
  2760. Certainly there's an obsession to get this story out. And the
  2761. characters are alive, on one level...because you have to imagine them
  2762. as being real in order to write them. 22 times a year I crack a window
  2763. to peer in at them....
  2764. jms
  2765. ------------------------------
  2766. Date: 30 Jan 1997 02:04:52 -0700
  2767. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2768. To: Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com>
  2769. Subject: Catherine Sakai
  2770. Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com> asks:
  2771. > Forgive me for being out of the loop, but I was just wondering
  2772. > (you see, I got B5 religion sort of late in life and hence missed
  2773. > the early eps, except those I begged copies of once it hit me) if
  2774. > anyone knows what ever happened to Catherine Sakai? Did she go off
  2775. > to Minbar with him? Did he just go traipsing back in time without
  2776. > so much as a phone call? Or was it just not dealt with, what with
  2777. > the universe needing to be saved and all? Or maybe she took one
  2778. > look at Sheridan and was too overcome by lust to remember her own
  2779. > name, let alone Sinclair's? Whatdaya think?
  2780. > Any chance she'll show up again, and maybe a technomage can give
  2781. > her a one way ticket to Valen-land on the orange blossom express?
  2782. The fate of Catherine Sakai will be revealed in a coming B5
  2783. novel from Dell.
  2784. jms
  2785. ------------------------------
  2786. Date: 30 Jan 1997 12:31:55 -0700
  2787. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2788. To: Michael Beemer <71551.1670@compuserve.com>
  2789. Subject: Harlan on 'PI'
  2790. Michael Beemer <71551.1670@compuserve.com> asks:
  2791. > "He" being Maher?
  2792. He didn't know what the blacklisting was...if he did, he'd know
  2793. that 90% of those called before HUAC had *nothing* to do with the "Evil
  2794. Empire" of communism, and have been shown to have been innocent. If
  2795. anything, the hearings gave aid and comfort to the other side.
  2796. jms
  2797. ------------------------------
  2798. Date: 30 Jan 1997 12:31:56 -0700
  2799. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2800. To: Alan Mulvie <100566.1444@compuserve.com>
  2801. Subject: Season 5 Cancelled?
  2802. Alan Mulvie <100566.1444@compuserve.com> asks:
  2803. > I'm sure you would keep us well informned, but on a metter of
  2804. > copyright/ownership if the worst came to the worst and Warner
  2805. > Bros pulled the plug on Season 5, would you be able to take it to
  2806. > another station/production company? I don't know how this all
  2807. > works, but for instance could Paramount or Fox legaly allow you
  2808. > to finish the five year arc?
  2809. No, the show can't leave WB for any reason. It's this or
  2810. nothing.
  2811. jms
  2812. ------------------------------
  2813. Date: 30 Jan 1997 12:31:57 -0700
  2814. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2815. To: (blocked)
  2816. Subject: Heroes
  2817. {original post unavailable}
  2818. No, I think you nailed it pretty well, anything I could add
  2819. would just be lagniappe.
  2820. jms
  2821. ------------------------------
  2822. Date: 30 Jan 1997 12:31:58 -0700
  2823. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2824. To: (blocked)
  2825. Subject: NATPE & Rumors
  2826. (blocked) asks:
  2827. > Is this enemy action, or a devious friend?
  2828. Neither...I think it's just people talking to talk, to show
  2829. they may have some inside information, whether such exists or not....
  2830. jms
  2831. ------------------------------
  2832. Date: 30 Jan 1997 12:32:00 -0700
  2833. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2834. To: John Yuen <72466.1621@compuserve.com>
  2835. Subject: JMS' scriptwriting book
  2836. {original post had no questions}
  2837. Yeah, well, when they're that small and young, they move fast,
  2838. I couldn't get a bead on her.
  2839. jms
  2840. ------------------------------
  2841. Date: 30 Jan 1997 22:42:05 -0700
  2842. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2843. To: Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com>
  2844. Subject: Writing
  2845. Jean S McKnight <105513.130@compuserve.com> asks:
  2846. > Can you recommend any books on writing?
  2847. I don't keep up with the general writing books, I'm afraid.
  2848. jms
  2849. ------------------------------
  2850. Date: 30 Jan 1997 22:42:07 -0700
  2851. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2852. To: Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com>
  2853. Subject: Catherine Sakai
  2854. Jonathan Kass <74130.443@compuserve.com> asks:
  2855. > any that are out that you might recommend especially?
  2856. Basically, my opinion on the novels is that they've been wildly
  2857. uneven. Some were pretty good, some just fell down, for me. A large
  2858. part of the problem was that we went through the notion of taking
  2859. proposals for books, and 9 times out of 10 the writer wanted to tell
  2860. the story about his guest characters, and the main characters took a
  2861. back seat. I protested and yelled, and finally decided that the only
  2862. way out was to pull novels out of my notes, and out of the series
  2863. itself.
  2864. So novel 1 of the next batch is about Anna, Morden and the
  2865. Icarus; in my view it's the best of the line published so far, I worked
  2866. very hard with the author to keep it in line with the series; the
  2867. second novel is set on Centauri Prime, from a short premise from me,
  2868. during the time when G'Kar is kept prisoner in Cartagia's cells, and
  2869. again our characters are in the center, though I think it isn't as
  2870. strong as the first one in this batch of three; the third novel, which
  2871. I haven't yet read in manuscript form, again from an assigned premise,
  2872. follows Sinclair and Sakai to Minbar and the creation of the Rangers.
  2873. With any luck, this batch will be very strong.
  2874. jms
  2875. ------------------------------
  2876. Date: 30 Jan 1997 22:42:10 -0700
  2877. From: J. Michael Straczynski <71016.1644@compuserve.com>
  2878. To: Deonaha M. Conlin <102531.2627@compuserve.com>
  2879. Subject: ><The Long Night>>
  2880. Deonaha M. Conlin <102531.2627@compuserve.com> asks:
  2881. > "Di.....?'
  2882. Thanks...I'm quite happy with this episode. It's fun.
  2883. jms
  2884. ------------------------------