lurkers-guide/ftp/Usenet/jms97-01-usenet

JMS Usenet messages for January 1997.

Date: 1 Jan 1997 22:39:09 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Actors in sequel

Nothing has yet been finalized (or even near to it) on the cast.


 jms





Date: 1 Jan 1997 23:19:34 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: who can you hire/fire?

"You're the writer and executive producer, and also big and tall. My
question are, within the limitations of the budget you get, who controls
the money?  Who has the final say over who to hire or fire, and what to
spend money on or not?  Do you control all of that, or do you
havemini-budgets for individual groups and let managers below you handle
the smaller details within?  Can you briefly list the parts of the
management hierarchy above and below you for, say, 1-2 levels?  Who's your
boss and your boss' boss?  To whom are you the immediate boss and who
reports to them?  Or maybe it's all a very flat hierarchy?"

Doug and I own Babylonian Productions.  Once the budget is allocated by
WB, we have full, final and complete discretionary control over it all. 
Now, if we're going to do something major -- fire or hire a recurring
actor or director -- we have to contact our liaison at WB and explain why,
and what impact it has on standing contracts.  Once they are brought into
the loop, they generally stamp "okay" on it and we move on.  They only get
into the major issues, not the smaller, day to day things.  

Guest stars: Doug and I have final authority, no need to check with WB;
costume designs, sets, CGI, prosthetics...I generally deal with all of
that, with John Copeland.  John handles a fair amount of this stuff as
well, but if there's any kind of decision that needs to be made, to
finalize stuff, it comes to me.  

And that's really the whole chain of command: me and Doug, then John; and
at the approval process for major changes, WB.


 jms





Date: 1 Jan 1997 23:26:36 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: What about your emotions? (writing question)

The emotional impact is always strongest in the writing of the scene
itself. 

The only way to write scenes such as the ones you list is to feel them
yourself, as strongly as the characters do.  Anything less, and it comes
across as fake or forced.  I felt very strongly when I offed Kosh...it was
very difficult for me, which was good, because then I knew it'd be hard on
others as well.


 jms





Date: 1 Jan 1997 23:27:46 -0500
Subject: Re: Attn JMS:  Delay in Season 4 title - waiting on year 5?

No, I'm mainly just sitting on the title because I'd like to set up the
next movment into which that title plays; it's something that's said in an
episode, and I want it to have the right context.  So I'm just sitting on
it for a bit.  It's not waiting for any outside factors; John and others
know the title, which is the title for episode 415.  No big.


 jms





Date: 4 Jan 1997 23:38:36 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: faster graphics group?

"So, my question is, do you see an improvement in the way or speed f/x are
done nowadays?  With what you have now, would you expect to ever have to
change schedules b/c f/x was taking too long?"

No, not really, because the system is about as fast as you can get it, and
so far we haven't seen any need to rearrange episodes or put anything back
due to cgi.  (#406 is as big as anything we've ever done...usually, we do
something that big toward the end of a season, with Severed Dreams an
exception.)  

It's mainly faster now in terms of the approval process.  Foundation would
lay off a jpg image of a shot in process, but it's just one frame...when
they'd deliver, it would be on an exobyte or laser disk transfer, and it
would come down from their offices in Santa Clarita once a day.  So often
you can lose a day or so in that process.  Now, it's over at post, which
is 12 minutes away.  We zip down, see the whole shot (sometimes in
wireframe or low-res tests), and approve or make changes at that stage,
saving a LOT of time in terms of re-do's and the like.




 jms






Date: 5 Jan 1997 02:38:24 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Changes in belief

"During the creation, writing and producing of Babylon5, have any of your
everyday beliefs been changed by your work? Has the planning and
construction of say an individual scene or theme ever had a profound
effect upon any of your personal views?"

Changed...no, I'd have to say not.  What it has done is clarify much of
it.  If I'm going to deal with some of these issues, I have to sit down
and really *think* about them...what do I think, what do others think, and
why do I/they think what I/they think?  So it has a tendency to make one
more reflective.  And while I've got pins stuck in a few things -- so I
can come back and consider them again when I have time -- overall, no, not
really.


 jms





Date: 5 Jan 1997 02:40:27 -0500
Subject: Re: Attn JMS: characters in control

"Has a character (not actor) ever suggested a direction to you that you
didn't take, but later on seemed like the direction you should have taken?
I would think they would all be fighting for screen-time, or is that just
some actors?"

Not really, mainly because if my subconscious mind is sufficiently up in
arms about something as to throw a fictional character at me and yell at
me, it's usually a sign that I should Shut The Hell Up And Do As I'm Told.
 So when it happens, I *very* rarely ignore it.  


 jms





Date: 5 Jan 1997 02:42:53 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS -- several anecdotes

Heath:

It's very rare when I'm stunned into speachlessness.  That one (actually
all of that as a unit) just did it.  Thanks.  

Who knows...maybe this show might work out yet....


 jms





Date: 5 Jan 1997 02:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: We haven't got it yet.

I think you'll be getting the rest of the big picture with the next batch
of eps.  Almost all the cards are on the table now.


 jms





Date: 5 Jan 1997 02:45:31 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: V script on-line

I won't post the whole script, because I'm considering what can be done
with it yet, including the possibility of getting WB to authorize a
novelization, which would be the very last official chapter in the V
story.


 jms





Date: 8 Jan 1997 01:26:09 -0500
Subject: Re: Question For JMS

Thanks...and the eyes were a projection of a shadow face, as you can note
in the main title.


 jms






Date: 8 Jan 1997 01:28:39 -0500
Subject: Re: B5 Content Rating

Nobody asked me about it...so I don't know who puts it on.


 jms





Date: 8 Jan 1997 01:29:02 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN:JMS-On Location?

We've only gotten as far out as the parking lot.


 jms





Date: 8 Jan 1997 01:32:10 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Future Publications

Actually, the writing book is out now...and I doubt the series bible will
ever be made available.


 jms





Date: 9 Jan 1997 15:01:16 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Will we see more about any of these people?

Out of those six, you'll be seeing 4 of them again, soonish.


 jms





Date: 9 Jan 1997 15:04:44 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS heros?

I think it's a matter of showing the formality and traditions of the other
races.  You're right, that humans don't honor their fallen heroes as much
as they should, but they never really have....


 jms





Date: 10 Jan 1997 03:17:10 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Whence came Apotheosis ...

Eye are a riter.  Eye read buks and eye remember wurds.  Wurds r my
bizness.  Eye have seen that wurd many, many times. Like in the
dikshonary. Eye read the dikshonary for funn.  Eye likes wurds.


 jms





Date: 10 Jan 1997 19:53:37 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Legality of burning downloaded clips into CD

If the clips were provided by WB, then I imagine it's legal, though again
I'm not an attorney and am speaking off the cuff; if they're grabs off the
broadcast, they're illegal to START with if they're being distributed over
the net, so any secondary use is equally unlawful.


 jms





Date: 14 Jan 1997 17:35:10 -0500
Subject: Re: Why was CC looking for work in the first place? (was: Claudia Christian loses LadyLaw roll to Marcia Clark

Lots of our cast members have always done projects on the side; Stephen
did the Misery sitcom, Andreas has done some feature work, including
Executive Decision, Peter did a miniseries for cable...the Lady Law gig
would've required one day a week just introducing stuff a la Robert Stack
on Unsolved Mysteries.


 jms





Date: 14 Jan 1997 17:35:12 -0500
Subject: Re: The WB and B5

Actually, the article got it wrong; at one point we went in to discuss the
sequel to B5 with the WB network, but we have never talked to them about
picking up B5, because we know that's not a possibility, given the
competition between the two arms of WB.


 jms





Date: 14 Jan 1997 21:13:46 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: 415?

415 and 416 are both in (the latter entitled "The Exercise of Vital
Powers"), and 417 should be in soonish.  S4 is going great so far, we're
very happy with it.


 jms





Date: 16 Jan 1997 03:34:01 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Can you go crazy with sequel?

In some ways, yeah, I think I will have some real opportunities that
didn't exist with B5, in that for the first 3 years we had to fight to get
ourselves taken seriously by everyone, including WB.  Now we have some
credibility, and that gives you a certain freedom.  

Also, the arc was, for me, a relatively new tool which took me about a
year or so to really figure out how to use...then I used it relentlessly
for a very long time.  Now it's just one more tool on my belt, and I can
use it with a bit more precision.  It's the difference between using a
rapier and a broadsword.  

It'll probably start out looking fairly conventional, as did B5 our first
year, just until the suits get comfortable and start ignoring us (they're
all OVER you in your first year), and then, again as with B5, we'll start
getting really subversive...ah loves being subversive....

And there'll be the folks who'll say, "Oh, it's just X," just like they
did with B5 in the beginning, saying "Oh, it's just like DS9," which is
*perfect* because it lets me sneak up behind them and just WHACK 'em
upside the head when they're not looking, as with B5.

Basically, without saying too much, it'll be a MUCH larger canvas, and the
kinds of stories I can tell will be CONSIDERABLY more varied and have more
opportunities to explore all kinds of interesting stuff, so I can go a bit
more nuts on production values, alien stuff, and other areas.


 jms





Date: 16 Jan 1997 04:04:40 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU APPROVED!

Thing about the autographed cards...there was no money involved in this,
it was done as a cool thing for the fans.  (Okay, I *did* ask for a full
set of the Kingdom Come cardset, because I didn't want to run all over the
planet running down chase cards)...and man, you have NO idea how long it
takes to sign 900 cards.  Hours, I tell you...hours and hours.

I suppose I could've signed more, to make more available to fans, but my
right hand fell off and it took a day and a half to stich it back on
again.


 jms





Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:41:12 -0500
Subject: Re: JMS has another job?

And you stiffed me for a tip, buddy....


 jms





Date: 17 Jan 1997 18:50:44 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Why take net points?

Because, if the show is successful in the long term, it gives you the
authority to go back and audit the show so you *can* get something, maybe,
years down the road.  If you don't get it into your contract, you can
never go back.  So you just swallow it and hope you can do something with
it someday.  It just becomes a bitch to prove they made a profit, because
they control the books.

For instance...we know that the first 3 years of B5 made a profit for WB
because WB has a policy of not renewing unless a profit is being made. 
Pure and simple.  We've heard, off the record, that the show posted
profits of between $1.5-2 million per season.  (And mind, that's while
we're still in production, spending money to make the show.  The instant
you stop production, and there's no more negative cash flow into filming,
it's all income from that moment on.)

But the actual, official profit statement sent to Doug and I for season 2
showed that we were about $42 million in the red.  The only way for that
to happen is for not one commercial to ever be sold, not one merchandising
deal ever to be made, not one cassette sold overseas...nada.

The process is to assign percentages to various arms of the company.  The
distribution fee is (these are off-the-cuff numbers, not necessarily
accurate but indicative) 30%; then the overhead is 40% of all monies; 25%
for publicity; 30% for production of prints, shipping, and the like.  So
what you're looking at here is over 100% in fees...and when you start from
that position, it takes you YEARS to whittle away at the production costs,
costs of film...by which time additional fees have been charged against
you...and on and on and on....


 jms





Date: 18 Jan 1997 04:48:11 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: FAN USE OF B5 STUFF

You can use images, as I understand it, AS LONG AS they bear the proper
copyright info, "copyright and trademark 1997 PTN Consortium."


 jms





Date: 18 Jan 1997 23:38:45 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: If WB owns B5, lock, stock, and barrel...

"This is what concerns me about a B5 spin-off.  If the show now becomes
too
popular, the anticipated spin-off just may turn into "Moppets in Space". 
I guess I don't have much confidence that the successors to B5 will not
turn into Voyager."

I created B5.  I didn't create Voyager.  And I have no interest in doing
moppets in space or anywhere else unless I can run a truck over them.

This ain't gonna be a problem.



 jms





Date: 18 Jan 1997 23:39:30 -0500
Subject: Re: Just wanted to thank Joe again for the show

Thanks.  In some ways, the show created itself...but I'm more than happy
to take the credit for it.


 jms





Date: 19 Jan 1997 04:17:57 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: 415?

Let me clarify a small point in all this. 

We shoot straight through, from August to May.  We don't stop, we can't
stop, except for the occasional holiday, like Christmas or Thanksgiving,
plus one four day hiatus in the fall, and one in the spring.  That's the
only way to make our delivery dates, and to produce this or any OTHER
series.

You can't take a position of, "Okay, I'm going to stop writing scripts and
wait to see what happens."  So if that's the point of concern -- why is
Joe writing if he doesn't know? -- it's because you just can't stop
filming.  The cost alone would be hideous, and that alone would guarantee
the death of B5.

You have to get the basic script into the hopper literally 6 weeks before
you shoot it, so that there's adequate time to build costumes, design and
construct sets, plan EFX shots and the like. 

What you can do, though, and what's being done to some extent, is to plan
out alternate scenes, and alternate endings to scenes, *within* those sets
and using those EFX.  It's not that unlike a computer game tree.  Once we
get closer to filming them, we'll have a better idea of where things
stand, and I'll know which way to go.

You want a bottom line, I'd say it's this: the last sweeps period, we
averaged a 3.8 rating, the highest we've had in a long, long time.  A huge
jump.  If we can crack a 4 rating in the February sweeps, I think it would
be very hard for WB *not* to give us a fifth season.  If we fall short,
then it becomes more problematic.

So as of now, it's all in the hands of the Neilsen gods, starting January
27th.


 jms





Date: 19 Jan 1997 19:32:01 -0500
Subject: Re: JMS: Your bag of tricks

"Is "the online experiment" also now in your bag of tricks? I.e. assuming
you get to season 5, the 2 TV movies and/or Crusade, do you intend to have
the same presence online or do you want to appear in forums and newsgroups
less often?"

Thing is...I don't consider the online thing part of my bag of tricks,
which mainly I would consider technical or literary or structural devices
used in the writing.  

You've got to understand that I didn't just jump online when B5 rolled
around.  I've been online since about 1984..logging onto Compuserve and
other BBSs via a Kaypro II with 64K RAM and 128K floppies, NO hard drive. 
When B5 came along, I just kept doing what I'd been doing from the start. 
More of it, granted, but it's the same thing.

So in future...yeah, I imagine I'd keep online, until it finally drove me
nuts.  Perhaps not as much as now, only because the CTS acts up more some
days than others, and it's only going to get worse and I'll have to
concentrate that on the writing...but yeah, I'll be here.

I've always been here.


 jms





Date: 19 Jan 1997 19:35:16 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: 415?

It would be inappropriate for me to address a direct question about or
which would be conveyed to a Neilsen family...all I can say is that in the
syndication market, which has a much smaller base to begin with, every
little bit helps.


 jms





Date: 20 Jan 1997 17:26:32 -0500
Subject: Re: JMS: Your bag of tricks

I can't use voice recognition stuff...I think through my fingers.


 jms





Date: 20 Jan 1997 17:27:06 -0500
Subject: Re: ''ATTN   JMS''

I can only say that you'll get most of the answers to those questions
soon.


 jms





Date: 20 Jan 1997 17:22:28 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Is the future all it's cracked up to be? (repost)

No, the future is now largely set...the Londo/G'Kar death scene will
happen as foreseen.


 jms





Date: 20 Jan 1997 17:24:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Babylon 5 & Mormonism

"Two data points a statistical proof does not make, but the similarly
between the names, and the similarity of the Mimbari/Earth soul transfer
to the Mormon teaching (correct me here if I am wrong) that in the next
life our souls go as a type of god to another planet to populate it make
me wonder if there is some Mormon influence in the B5 mythos."

Not no way, not no how.


 jms





Date: 21 Jan 1997 17:15:24 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: What about your comics about Marcus?

The Marcus story was folded into one of the upcoming novels.


 jms





Date: 21 Jan 1997 17:17:18 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Sweet Revenge

Oh, I got him...but I'd prefer to save that story for the next convention
rather than blow it online quite yet.  I'd like to have *some* new
material that people haven't already heard.


 jms





Date: 21 Jan 1997 17:30:33 -0500
Subject: Re: Ratings for syndicated action shows

DS9 is still toward the top of the ratings, but the "naysayers" are
correct about the decline in actual numbers.  (And DS9 does fall below
Xena and Hercules in many cases, btw.)

Here are the Neilsen figures for DS9 for the last several quarters:
4th quarter 95: 7.1
1st quarter 96: 6.7
2nd quarter 96: 5.9
3rd quarter 96: 4.8

The jump in 4th quarter 96 is apparently due to a lot of new eps airing,
and some stunting...the Tribbles episode and the like.

By comprison, here are B5's numbers of the last number of quarters:
3rd quarter 95: 2.7
4th quarter 95: 2.9
1st quarter 96: 3.0
2nd quarter 96: 3.1
3rd quarter 96: (being retablulated for some errors)
4th quarter 96: 3.6

DS9's season-to-date average has gone from 6.8 to 6.1.
B5's STD average has gone from 3.0 to 3.3.

And our demographics continue to be better than DS9.

This isn't a qualitative statement, only to confirm what has been said:
that DS9's ratings have been declining (also noted by the trades, which
have found drops from 18% to 20% for both the ST shows) and that B5's
ratings have been growing during the same period of time.


 jms





Date: 22 Jan 1997 17:06:02 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS: Watching TV

"when you're watching TV, especially shows like the Tick, which is clever
and 
well written, how much of you can just watch the show, and how much takes 
mental notes and analyzes and second-guesses the writers?"

It's about 50/50.  In terms of comedy, I'm always subconsciously working
out the punchline as soon as the setup comes in.  I'm not one of those
people who laughs out loud most of the time at TV shows or movies because
I often get there early.  Where I do lose it is when the comedy is totally
unexpected and unpredictable.  I love being surprised.  

But in general, part of me is always studying, whether I'm consciously
aware of it or not...structure, rhythms of dialogue, that sort of thing. 
I didn't know quite how much I do this until one evening back in
college...see, I have this habit of tapping my fingers to the rhythms of
dialogue, on my knee, or on the desk, I'm not aware of it most days, it's
just a way of physicalizing spoken rhythms, and we all have different
rhythms when we speak that tell a lot about us...and I was at a movie with
a young lady, and didn't realize I was tapping out the rhythms of the
dialogue on her shoulder until she WHAPPED me a good one.


 jms





Date: 22 Jan 1997 23:23:10 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATT JMS: Visual look of Season 4?

The lighting varies depending on what's being filmed; you go for a whole
different mood in Z'ha'dum than in the Zocalo.  You can do more.  The
sense and mood changes from episode to episode.


 jms






Date: 23 Jan 1997 03:53:09 -0500
Subject: Re: JMS to Appear on IRC [97 jan 22]

Hang on, though...I just found out tonight that they have a maximum
capacity of 250 on this thing, and I'm determined not to have another
debacle like the last one.  So this may not come off.


 jms





Date: 23 Jan 1997 03:59:30 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Season 5 vs. Sequel

I know it seems like a weird contradiction...it comes from a weird
situation.

PTEN, the network that airs B5, is no more.  Most of the stations have
joined UPN, and the corporate structure is no more.  Imagine, for
instance, the hassles in keeping a show on ABC if ABC suddenly no longer
existed.  But the rights were tied to ABC, the people who once owned it
want to cash in their chips and get out, and they can't take the show
anywhere else...partly for competitive reasons, partly because the rights
are held by a company that basically no longer exists.

You may keep at it for a while, because you believe in it, and it's
showing a profit, but there's always those guys in the corporation who
keep pressuring you to let it go and clean out the books.  Those guys are
in a tussle over B5 that has almost zilch to do with ratings, or letters,
and everything to do with corporations and the  financial organization
thereof.

So while all this is going on...they're also saying, "Well, we believe in
this, and if we can't move the show elsewhere, and the rights are tied up,
perhaps another show that's free of the corporate entanglements and rights
hassles would be a good idea, both on its own, as a fall back if the
corporate wrangling gets too much, and/or if the series does go to 5
seasons as a companion show for crossovers."

In other words...it's all in a state of total flux while the corporate
guys try to figure out what to do next.  And we're caught in the middle,
unable to do anything but watch and see what happens.

Does this explain some of the confusion and conflicting signals?


 jms





Date: 23 Jan 1997 04:07:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Ratings for syndicated action shows

To confirm demographics...this stuff is usually in detailed form in the
networks hands, but places like Broadcasting Magazine often do updates on
it as well.


 jms





Date: 23 Jan 1997 06:57:59 -0500
Subject: Re: Ratings for syndicated action shows

"Someone should tell me why someone like me can't like B5 AND DS9 without
having to defend one or the other; I like 'em both, don't shoot me!"

I couldn't agree more.  My quibble was with those who look facts they
don't like in the face and write them off as "naysayers."  Numbers is
numbers, but personal tastes are personal tastes, and as far as I'm
concerned, the more SF the merrier.


 jms






Date: 24 Jan 1997 08:57:54 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS:  Atlanta Journal Article

It's the same article that got printed in the NY Daily News, and a) it
takes a comment of mine completely out of context, b) they're going to
publish a follow up correction in a couple of days, and c) we get this
every season.  We won't know for a little bit yet.


 jms






Date: 24 Jan 1997 01:41:07 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS: "End of History?"

"the end of history" is a term used by some sociologists, historians and
social scientists to describe significant changes...some of them are
referring to the present as the end of history.  That's a VERY poor and
inadequate explanation of the term, and I'm confident that others here
probably know the details and can explain it better than I can.


 jms





Date: 24 Jan 1997 01:43:40 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS: Janet Greek.

Janet's off doing network stuff these days.


 jms





Date: 24 Jan 1997 16:55:48 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS: Fav tracks on new CD?

I'm going to have to listen to this a few more times before I know which
tracks I prefer.  There's a nifty extended version of the first season
theme music that's very nice...other stuff that's most impressive...I'm
very pleased overall.



 jms





Date: 25 Jan 1997 02:12:54 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN:  JMS - Title of Season 4 (SPOILER?)

Yes, that's the correct title.


 jms





Date: 25 Jan 1997 02:12:57 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS:  Toys, premiums, tie-ins, and your input

We haven't done a whole lot of merchandising mainly because I want to get
into that slowly, and not let it begin to influence the show or put
priorities in the wrong order.  

I work to varying extents with the licensees, but basically I get input at
every stage of the product's development, from conceptual artwork or
outlines, through to the final product.  

For instance, today I got the revised transparency for the Delenn
collector plate coming out from Hamilton...and it's gorgeous, just signed
right off on that one, probaby the best of the two I've seen so far (#1
being Sheridan).  Delenn/Mira almost glows off the image at you.  Others
require more more work...when the novels come in, I do what I can, but
often the deadlines are so tight that in the past it's been hard to get
all the stuff I want revised, revised.  This time on the next 3 I worked
more hand-in-glove at the outine stage, so that they would be better.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 04:12:38 -0500
Subject: Re: News Service Report: Season 5 "Looks Doubtful"

The newspaper syndicated strip that carried the first report about the
show being doubtful just ran a follow-up on Friday taking back that
comment.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 04:15:57 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN  JMS:  At this point, can we help w/renewal

No, at this point it's all between WB and the stations.

One other complication to all this is that both WBN and UPN are adding
another night each, and that chews up more available spots...and there are
a LOT of other new syndicated shows coming out, from Stargate to Total
Recall and others, and X-Files, NYPD Blue and Homicide are all also
hitting syndication at the same time, so it's very, very, very scary out
there right now.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 04:11:02 -0500
Subject: Re:  ATTN JMS : Whatever Happened To . . . Mike Vejar

Mike got grabbed up by other shows for most of the fall before we got word
of our pickup.  Once we got renewed, we booked him as fast as we could,
and he's directing one for us right now.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 21:52:45 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Favorite SF authors

Sheckley's stuff is great.  His novel, "Mind Swap," I think the name was,
is just hysterically funny.  And Callahan's Crosstime Saloon is always
great stuff.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 21:57:36 -0500
Subject: Re: TNT, B5 Movies, and Reruns

Your understanding is correct, and basically the show would start
rerunning on TNT about 6 months after the show is finished.


 jms





Date: 26 Jan 1997 22:41:08 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: What if season 5 gets a go too late

That scenario is not very likely.  We should know soonish.


 jms






Date: 26 Jan 1997 22:42:48 -0500
Subject: Re: Could B5 go to a network?

No, there's no chance.  The problem is that B5 is owned by a consortium,
with WB on one side, and the station group on the other.  When you see a
show hopping networks, it's often (for instance) a Universal show that
goes from ABC to CBS.  Universal still is the sole owner of the show, it's
just a question of which network shows it, and the network doesn't own it.

With PTEN, WB and the stations own the show, though the copyright for most
actual artifacts of the show belongs to WB.  WB Network wants to carve out
its own identity rather than taking leftovers from another, competing WB
division.  The regular networks won't take an off-syndication show.  The
idea of WB going to Paramount/UPN...well, that one's self-explanatory as a
non-starter.

It can't even go to TNT because of contractual elements between WB and the
stations.  So it's either this arrangement, or nothing.


 jms






Date: 27 Jan 1997 04:32:42 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Favorite SF authors

And before anyone yells at me, 10 seconds after I posted this, I
remembered that the Callahan's books were by Spider Robinson, I know, I
know, mea culpa, I stooged it, what can I say...?


 jms





Date: 28 Jan 1997 20:20:40 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS:  TNT Reruns of B5

It's my understanding that B5 will run daily on TNT, M-F, at 6:00 p.m.


 jms





Date: 29 Jan 1997 01:41:03 -0500
Subject: Re: F1 Resolution - Too Easy? (Spoilers 406 -> )

>Thanks to the super-wonderful Spoiler Junkies page
>the apparent resolution of the problems imposed by the
>ultra-powerful First Ones is revealed. 

Except, of course, that ain't what happens in the episode.

That's what you get for reading spoilers instead of watching the episode,
especially summaries which a) sometimes don't present the whole picture,
and b) which I've lately been able to get my hands on and, even though the
main story has to go out, I'm able to...edit out...little but important
details, JUST TO PISS OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHO READ THE DAMNED THINGS!

Finally, FINALLY, I have my vengeance over the spoiler junkies....ha HA
ha-ha-HA ha HAAAA....

I need a vacation....


 jms





Date: 29 Jan 1997 09:46:48 -0500
Subject: Re:  Harlan Ellison on "Politically Incorrect"

"H.E. was saying that the McCarthy hearings and red-hunting trials in the
USA from 1947 to 1954 were "just as bad" as Stalin's justice system.
(Which is of course absurd, but it's very Harlan.   It's unlikely he would
actually defend such a claim if he weren't hyper-excited.  Of course, it's
also unlikely he'll ever cease to be hyper-excited.)"

Absolutely incorrect.  I and many other people feel the same way.  The
House UnAmerian Activities Committee (HUAC) destroyed innocent people with
just as much efficiency and cruelty as the Stalinist courts ever did. 
(Remember the lesson from "Infection"..."when you become obsessed with the
enemy, you BECOME the enemy.")

J. Parnell Thomas and Joe McCarthy decided that there were X-number of
communists in the military, industry, radio and the motion picture
business, and they were determined to find them whether they existed or
not.  People were brought before the committee and told to name names of
those they thought might be red.  Not that they *were* red (and some, a
very few, were), but that they *might be*.  And even if you didn't know
anyone who *might be*, if you didn't name SOMEbody, you might be assumed
to be hiding something...and end up blacklisted yourself.  

It was crime by association, by implication, by innuendo, by distortion
and by lie.  People saw their careers destroyed, their lives ruined, their
families devastated.  They had to flee the country to work.  Some went to
jail.  Some were so utterly destroyed by the process that they committed
suicide.  

No, it wasn't equal to the sheer numbers of the Stalinist death
camps...but in terms of a one-to-one experience, the one was every bit as
vile, sadistic and unholy as the other.  And just as random.  

One film maker, hired BY OUR OWN GOVERNMENT to make films during the
second world war about the benefits of working with the Russians to defeat
the Nazis later found those same films used to prove he was a commie
sympathizer.

A leading radio dramatist of his age was never even called before the
committee, but his name was listed in Red Channels, a crummy little
broadsheet published by the owner of a SUPERMARKET CHAIN in the East
Coast, a guy who one day decided that this writer was a little too pink
for his tastes...and that writer's career stopped THAT DAY.

If Harlan got exercised about it...and if I got exercised about it...it's
because we are writers, and many writers, actors and directors who had
never done anything to anyone, who had nothing to do with reds, were
destroyed in full light of the national media.  Jeff Corey didn't work for
about 20 years after his run-in; same for Zero Mostel.  It's something we
feel *very* strongly about.  


 jms






Date: 30 Jan 1997 02:03:01 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN:JMS  Are you at all concerned about "Farewell"?

"Are you at all concerned that, when it's all said and done, that some
fans will scratch their heads and wonder:  "You mean thats it?""

No, I don't think so.  The story for "Sleeping in Light," the last B5
episode, is such that it is completely moveable, and self-contained, and
buttons down the arc in what I think is a very moving fashin.  I think
that when it's all said and done, the average reaction will be to sit back
and say, "That was a good story."  Obviously you can't please everyone,
and you can't expect to.  But basically, yeah, I think it's going to end
well.


 jms





Date: 30 Jan 1997 02:06:05 -0500
Subject: Re: YO JMS Dilbert & Geo. Washington

"I've never actually seen the comic strip myself, but, gosh, I'd think
Patrick McGoohan (sorry for the spelling) or one of the other actors or
personalities (like yourself) we fans would like to see guest star or
cameo on the program would be more appropriate?"

We're still after McGoohan, but again that will depend entirely on the
role.  I'm toying with one now that we'll send along and see what happens.
 The Adams thing is a quick cameo...for McGoohan you want to do something
major.

"Another question: I was thumbing through some SF magazine or other when I
spotted you posing with an award (sorry, I can't remember which one).
Anyway, 
you weren't smiling. All the photos I've seen of you you never smile. Come
on
Joe - smile for the birdy!! Once in a while? Sometimes I think you've got
wooden teeth or something."

I hate cameras.  I'm mind-bogglingly unphotographic.


 jms





Date: 30 Jan 1997 21:59:50 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS - What about "The Babylon Project"?

I just got in the full-color proofs of the main book, and it's not only
gorgeous, it's the best single compilation of B5 universe information that
I've ever seen.  They had to do a fair amount of filling in the gaps here
and there, but what went in fits perfectly, and I highly recommend it. 
They went to a great deal of work and research on the show, and you can
see it in every panel.

So it should be out soon, since this is the final version.


 jms





Date: 31 Jan 1997 09:17:37 -0500
Subject: Re: jms graphics note (cgal repost)

"Joe, I don't think anyone *really* doubted that the new FX would be any
good."

Then, Mojo, if nobody "doubted that the new FX would be good," explain to
me whence came all those messages from pseudonymous individuals posted on
the newsgroup saying that they were going to be crap, that there wouldn't
BE any EFX, that the show was going to hell...on and on.  My message was
in reply to those individuals who set out deliberately to trash us.  If
they didn't doubt the EFX would be good, then why did they say so?  If
they did post messages that the EFX would be crap, which they did, then
why would you say that no one doubted it?  Are you suggesting they
deliberately lied in their messages?  Or that the messages, which exist,
did NOT really exist (dream state) or that they were in fact accidentally
crossposted from Bizarro World.  "New B5 EFX am bad!" meaning that they're
great.  Perhaps that's what you're suggesting.

"I'm sure that your Foundation Imaging-trained team, using Foundation
Imaging objects and Foundation animation techniques will turn out some
very fine work indeed!"

It's nothing to do with Foundation one way or another...the message posted
was in reference to the people who were slamming the people who were now
doing the B5 EFX...that has nothing whatsoever to do with what I was
discussing.

If you felt this strongly about the quality of those doing the EFX, then
I'm surprised you didn't defend these individuals from the attacks then
being made.  If they're Foundation trained, using Foundation tech, and
someone's out there trashing them, I'd think that Foundation would
actively want to defend them.  I guess when it looked like they'd be crap,
there wouldn't be much point to defending them...but when they came out
well, then I can see why one would want to jump in and make sure that
Foundation shared the credit.

(BTW, your note accidentally left out Eric Chauvin's fine work on the
show, who created many of the images of Minbar, Earth, the Garden and
other amazing sights...or Steve Burg, who helped design the Starfuries and
many other ships, neither of whom are part of Foundation.  It would be an
error for people to assume that Foundation was the be-all and end-all of
B5's EFX, and I know that neither you nor Ron would want to create that
impression.)

And certainly, we continue to use Eric on the show, and others, who were
never a part of Foundation Imaging.  So it wold be an error to imply that
they all came to us from there.

Our animators have acquired a wide range of experience, at Foundation and
elsewhere.  We have always spoken well of Foundation, which came into
existence because Doug and I were willing to give Ron a chance.  And we
have never wished them anything but good fortune.

Our continued best wishes to everyone there.


 jms