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.
831 lines
37 KiB
831 lines
37 KiB
STAR TREK: BUJOLD TOO BOLDLY GOES! #818975
|
|
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:26
|
|
|
|
I was lucky to have a *number* of very fine, talented actors when I
|
|
was working on THE TWILIGHT ZONE. Bruce Weitz, Eddie Albert, Janet Leigh
|
|
and others. The thing about TZ and other anthology shows is that it lets
|
|
you do the kind of writing you really can't do on regular series, because
|
|
there isn't time, you're rushing from one complication to another, whereas
|
|
a show like TZ is built around one central element, and what matters is
|
|
how that one element affects the characters. It gives you the luxury of
|
|
*time*.
|
|
|
|
(And the episode you cite, "Rendezvous in a Dark Place," is one of
|
|
my favorites as well, up with the Albert and Weitz episodes.)
|
|
|
|
In the first season of B5, we worked hard to keep the pace as fast
|
|
as possible, to really crank the story, establish the universe, and jump
|
|
start this puppy. Now that that's done, I'm working now to apply a
|
|
somewhat Zone- ish approach, in that we're carving out time now for more
|
|
personal stuff, to see how the stories affect our characters. If I can
|
|
blend these two approaches, I'll be a happy man.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 6:38:24 #820032
|
|
|
|
"...there is going to be a Star Trek store someday."
|
|
|
|
Too late. There's already a Star Trek store on the Universal Studios
|
|
tour, and in other amusement/tour locations, and the Creation/Sci-Fi
|
|
Universe stores, despite carrying a small number of items from other shows,
|
|
are primarily ST stores, and they're spreading.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 1:34:01 #820574
|
|
|
|
I once asked David Gerrold how many Trek movies would finally be made,
|
|
when all was said and done. "One too many," he said.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: VOYAGER CAPTAIN QUITS! #820931
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 2:50:25
|
|
|
|
"Stephanie Beacham is off VOYAGER because she didn't want to move
|
|
with the production to Florida."
|
|
|
|
Huh? Last I heard, SeaQuest was moving to Florida, not Voyager.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: BUJOLD WALKS--RUMOR? #818977
|
|
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:22
|
|
|
|
We shoot an episode of B5 in 7 days. Then the director gets 3 days
|
|
to make his cut (he's been doing so all along with the editor as film
|
|
comes in, but that's the final period where he or she has to finish).
|
|
Then John Copeland and I go in and re-edit the director's cut (to small
|
|
or major degrees) to make the producer's cut. Another three days. So
|
|
two weeks so far.
|
|
|
|
We then do an edit-master of the episode (done on film, as opposed to
|
|
the edit, done on computer-image Avids), which arrives in about 5-7 days.
|
|
So three weeks. We're also waiting for any rotoscope work that needs to
|
|
be done on the show (PPG blasts, other non-space stuff, like the
|
|
thought-wall in "Mind War"), and for any compositing work (live + CGI),
|
|
which can take up to a few more days to a few weeks. Split the difference
|
|
and say two weeks. So now we're up to five weeks.
|
|
|
|
Midway through this process, we meet with Chris Franke and the
|
|
sound people to spot the episode, indicating where sound EFX and music
|
|
should go. We're also designing titles, doing any looping that might
|
|
be required. We now wait for the music to be scored, and for the
|
|
sound EFX to be designed. Give it another 10-14 days. Now 7-8 weeks in.
|
|
|
|
Finally, at that point -- 8-9 weeks or so -- we go in and do the
|
|
final sound mix, entering in all the finished elements, and deliver
|
|
the episode a week or so later.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: BUJOLD WALKS--RUMOR? #818976
|
|
DATE: SUN SEP 11, 1994 4:55:11
|
|
|
|
I believe you're thinking of a recent problem in Comics Forum, where
|
|
a journalist was MISquoting people (viz: me) in a certain magazine, without
|
|
my prior knowledge or permission, and I was leaving unless some procedures
|
|
were put in place protecting Forum members from having this happen to them,
|
|
particularly the pros. This has been done, insofar as it *can* be done,
|
|
so that tussle is now over.
|
|
|
|
On the topic of religion...yes, we've spent a fair amount of time
|
|
on the subject, and to your note that the "show has portrayed religion
|
|
exceptionally well; it is nice to know that faith is not dead in your
|
|
future as in all the ST shows," someone commented on another forum that
|
|
because I'm an atheist, and don't have any particular axe to grind, it's
|
|
possible to treat the beliefs of others with some measure of equanimity.
|
|
It seems a sensible idea, I hadn't really thought about it, and there may
|
|
be some measure of truth to that.
|
|
|
|
I've always taken a great degree of interest in varying belief
|
|
systems. I've read the Bible cover to cover (twice), as well as
|
|
whatever other books I could get my hands on, from the Bahagavad Gita
|
|
(hope I spelled that right from memory) up and down the road. What you
|
|
come away with is a sense that the religious impulse, whether or not
|
|
any one of them is fundamentally correct, is part of the human dynamic,
|
|
and it's not going to suddenly up and disappear. The job of the writer
|
|
is to treat his subject honestly, and that seems to me the truth of the
|
|
matter.
|
|
|
|
For six thousand years, humanity has been in the process of trying
|
|
to figure out itself, and where its place is in the universe, and what
|
|
the universe IS, really. There are a number of ways one can approach
|
|
that question, and the religious impulse is part of that. In the
|
|
earliest stages of its development, it was the religious impulse that
|
|
prompted us to look up to the stars and ask, "What?"...and to look at
|
|
ourselves and each other and say "Who?"...and to look at death and
|
|
say "Why?" It was, in a sense, the earliest form of the scientific
|
|
method, except there weren't the tools for true inquiry. But if humanity
|
|
had not begun with the process of asking questions, it might not have
|
|
developed science, since science is predicated upon self-awareness, and
|
|
questioning, and looking at the universe and asking those very same
|
|
questions. The paths taken, and the means used, diverge quickly, and
|
|
I'm not in ANY way equating science and religion, they are of necessity
|
|
and by definition different creatures, but they share some roots in the
|
|
intentions that created them.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: RELIGION IN B5 #820033
|
|
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 6:38:25
|
|
|
|
Actually, we did have a pagan and a wiccan in there, though we
|
|
couldn't prolong the voice-over long enough to get there. In at least
|
|
one other shot of that in dailies, it's very plainly there.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: SURVIVORS #820918
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 2:39:18
|
|
|
|
Definitely; there are additional fighters berthed inside Earthforce
|
|
One, with a minimum four outside on constant patrol. In addition, it's
|
|
got some pretty hefty defensive weaponry on board, though they're worked
|
|
into the design so that they don't appear too obvious (bad for PR).
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
=================================
|
|
BABYLON 5: SCRIPTS AND CC #819567
|
|
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:39:12
|
|
FROM: SYSOP LEE WHITESIDE
|
|
|
|
Joe, I've watched a couple of B5 episodes with the closed captioning on
|
|
and it is interesting to see how what they display on screen is a lot of
|
|
times not quite what the cast is actually saying. Do the Closed captioning
|
|
people work from a script or from a tape of the episode?
|
|
=================================
|
|
BABYLON 5: SCRIPTS AND CC #819569
|
|
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:55:22
|
|
|
|
Supposedly they're working off scripts...not very well, from what
|
|
you're saying.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #819568
|
|
DATE: MON SEP 12, 1994 3:55:21
|
|
|
|
We get virtually *no* coverage from any major publications on
|
|
anything near a regular basis. We're as close to a stealth television
|
|
program as you can get. I think there'll be a small piece in Newsweek
|
|
as part of an overall roundup on TV/BBSing in a few weeks or less, but
|
|
that's all.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #821230
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 7:29:11
|
|
|
|
Yes, we've definitely gotten more coverage, and continue to do so,
|
|
in the UK than we do here in the US. The show rates very highly on
|
|
Channel 4, and they've already committed to year two without having to
|
|
look at the first batch of episodes, which they don't usually do. I
|
|
think the audience in the UK is more used to the kind of thing we're
|
|
doing, and so it's grabbing hold just that much more quickly. Thus the
|
|
media pays more attention. Ironic that we're having a harder time here
|
|
than overseas; it's usually the other way around. (Apparently we're also
|
|
doing very well in other countries as well; in some cases, we do better
|
|
overseas than here in the US.)
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #820576
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 13, 1994 1:34:02
|
|
|
|
Thanks, and to you guys on the ones you walked off with.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 SHIRTS/800TREKKER #822797
|
|
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:12
|
|
|
|
I just saw some new shirt designs from a non-Creation licensee,
|
|
All-U, and they're *gorgeous*. And some new Creation items, bookmarks
|
|
and pins, that also look quite nice.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
=====
|
|
QUESTION #821957: LDS/Mormon missionary in the receiving line (PoD)?
|
|
=====
|
|
BABYLON 5: RELIGION ON B5 #822772
|
|
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:42:21
|
|
|
|
Yes, I believe that's correct.
|
|
|
|
No Scientologists, though.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 WINS MAKEUP EMMY #822795
|
|
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:08
|
|
|
|
Generally speaking, in the past, Starlog has generally screwed up
|
|
one aspect or another of their coverage of B5, to the point where I
|
|
won't have anything to do with them. I won't stop my cast or crew from
|
|
talking to Starlog -- that's their choice, and I don't feel that in all
|
|
good conscience I can interfere -- but you won't see an interview with
|
|
me in Starlog.
|
|
|
|
Part of this is also due to the fact that Dave McDonnell has stated
|
|
to many people that he feels obliged to carry B5 coverage, because it's
|
|
a legitimate show, and it does draw attention...but because they are
|
|
primarily a STAR TREK magazine, they will NEVER do a B5 cover. So they
|
|
get the coverage, but refuse to give it the respect it deserves with
|
|
a cover story.
|
|
|
|
Which is pretty much what I expected.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
==========
|
|
QUESTION #824019: <saw Rolling Stones ref in S&P; they
|
|
start war, have theme song> What did the rest of the
|
|
listing say?
|
|
===========
|
|
BABYLON 5: SIGNS & PORTENTS #824120
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 4:32:04 AM
|
|
|
|
Some things are better left un-commented upon.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
==========
|
|
QUESTION #823723: Why was the ship in Lady Ladira's name instead
|
|
of Lord Kiro's?
|
|
===========
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 12:03:23 AM #823906
|
|
|
|
Ladira was Kiro's aunt, and much of the family money/property is
|
|
in her name.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: BUJOLD: THE REAL REASON! #823907
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 12:03:25 AM
|
|
|
|
One thought indicating mercy for Bujold...apparently, according to
|
|
DAILY VARIETY, they were shooting 19 hour days. This means that you
|
|
show up at 6 a.m. and don't leave until 2 a.m., counting makeup and
|
|
costume and other daily requirements. (The schedule is apparently to
|
|
make up lost time for the debut.) That's a *lot* to ask of ANY actor,
|
|
and if you're the lead, then that means you're in virtually every scene.
|
|
This isn't like showing up at 10 a.m. and going a few hours overtime;
|
|
this is, as stated, 6 a.m. to 2 a.m.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: BUJOLD: THE REAL REASON! #825165
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 4:39:14
|
|
|
|
Actors do not generally share in merchandising revenue. That goes
|
|
to Paramount. (Or whichever studio is involved in a project.)
|
|
|
|
Actors only get the salary for the series and movies they do.
|
|
|
|
The fans do not bestow wealth on the players of Trek.
|
|
|
|
For near 15 years after the original Trek, virtually none of the
|
|
cast members could get work. They had been typecast. It practically
|
|
killed some of their careers, and many of them have had virtually no
|
|
careers outside of the movies, which are few and far between. Many
|
|
current ST cast members are concerned about any new work; which was
|
|
why Brent Spiner only agreed to do the movie after it was agreed in
|
|
his contract that he had to do two non-ST movies.
|
|
|
|
The fans of a show view appearing in that show as a gift from God.
|
|
|
|
An actor approaches it as a job, and has to.
|
|
|
|
Just a word of perspective.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
=======
|
|
QUESTION #825242: <applicable to most series actors?>
|
|
=======
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 5:59:17 #825746
|
|
|
|
I suppose it depends on the level of performer you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: NEW INFO ON BUJOLD #826219
|
|
DATE: SUN SEP 18, 1994 12:29:31
|
|
|
|
The 154 days includes only weekdays. (That's shooting 22 episodes
|
|
in 7 days each.) Weekends are off. Also, no single actor works all of
|
|
those 12 hours every day. Some actors may appear in only one scene in
|
|
an episode, and to all intents and purposes have the rest of the week
|
|
off. Or they may appear over several days, but staggered, a scene
|
|
here or there.
|
|
|
|
Most of the time any actor spends in a day on set is waiting...
|
|
waiting for the lighting to get set, waiting for the camera to get moved
|
|
to another set, waiting for the director to block stuff out, waiting for
|
|
wardrobe or prosthetics or other areas. When they're finally on, they
|
|
work a lot: first the master shot (of which there are often multiple
|
|
takes), then over-the- shoulder shots, then closeups, and sometimes
|
|
extreme closeups, anywhere from 2-7 takes each, which are then repeated
|
|
for every *other* actor in the scene. It's hard, rigorous work.
|
|
|
|
The main difference in all of this is whoever your lead is; the
|
|
captain in a role like this can often be there through every scene or
|
|
a majority of scenes...which adds up fast.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: NEW NETWORKS #822796
|
|
DATE: THUR SEP 15, 1994 12:53:10
|
|
|
|
There was never talk of putting B5 on the WB network; its is only
|
|
PTEN, and if PTEN goes, so will B5. (And if WB does go through with
|
|
its purchase of NBC, I have a feeling they won't need a separate WB
|
|
network, so that may go away, and again I don't know therefore if they'll
|
|
continue with PTEN either...and B5 wouldn't be shifted to network in
|
|
any event.)
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 16, 1994 4:32:03 AM #824119
|
|
|
|
PTEN is a consortium of stations that have formed a partnership
|
|
with Warner Bros. Television. Shows produced for PTEN are owned jointly
|
|
by WB and the stations. It is *highly* unlikely that the station-owners
|
|
would allow a show to go from their side to a network of any kind, given
|
|
that this is their competition.
|
|
|
|
PTEN is a fine organization, and I have every hope for its longevity.
|
|
Nothing here should be construed to mean anything else. But many PTEN
|
|
spokespeople have stated that the weblet may, or may not, last beyond the
|
|
next few years, depending on corporate wrangling. Should PTEN go, it
|
|
would take B5 with it, unless it were such a HUGE success by then that
|
|
WB could choose to try direct syndication.
|
|
|
|
The Warner Bros. Network is a whole different corporate arm, and is
|
|
very competitive with PTEN. They would not want in any way to take up
|
|
any PTEN shows because it would muddy their identity (and they're probably
|
|
right in this).
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
THE CON SUITE: ATHEISM AND HUMANISM #825770
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 17, 1994 6:25:16
|
|
|
|
The Humanist Manifesto is known to very few, and read by fewer still.
|
|
Humanism is not a religion. It has been defined that way by religionists
|
|
who want to be able to attack it. "Humanism" by their definition is
|
|
anything they don't happen to like. They created it and piled it high
|
|
with every conspiracy theory, every social change, and created this great
|
|
boogeyman that does not in fact exist. Because hard-core religionists
|
|
MUST have some kind of crisis, some kind of looming spectre to pepetuate
|
|
the mindset that says they're standing against this dark force. With the
|
|
fall of communism, now it's so-called humanism.
|
|
|
|
Secular means only that, non-religous. Humanism means concerned with
|
|
the affairs of humans. It's not a religion in any way, manner, shape or
|
|
form; it has no collection plates, no churches, no doctrine, no schisms,
|
|
no ministers, no tax-free status, no deities, nothing.
|
|
|
|
Okay, fine, so a few people got together and wrote a tract. What
|
|
does this have to do with anything? Nobody I know has ever read it. I've
|
|
never seen it in any bookstores. You cling to this one tract as though
|
|
it were Proof Positive of the Great Secular Humanist Conspiracy. It was
|
|
just some people defining their attitudes, but this gets twisted around
|
|
into some terrible threat. Sad that a few people expressing an opinion
|
|
in a tract that gets almost no circulation would be perceived as a threat
|
|
to the mighty religious empire of 24-hour-a-day religious programming,
|
|
and religious colleges, and massive religious text publishing companies,
|
|
and radio stations...don't you see the pathetic nature of this? It's
|
|
like the elephant reeling in horror at a mouse.
|
|
|
|
By your definition, anything that states a principle is a religion.
|
|
I'm sorry, but language means what it means, it doesn't mean what you
|
|
want it to mean. A religion, according to the dictionary, requires the
|
|
belief in or worship of supernatural beings or gods. But you play the
|
|
oldest game: redefine the terms of the argument in ways that benefit your
|
|
side.
|
|
|
|
Let me repeat: this great Secular Humanist Conspiracy DOES NOT EXIST.
|
|
You and others like you have created it out of gossamer and a few pieces
|
|
of paper in order to have something to point at. Tell me, do you think
|
|
there are Secular Humanist cell meetings in the middle of the night?
|
|
I'm an atheist, I sure as hell wasn't invited to any of them. Where
|
|
Is it based? Where is its funding? Where can I go to a meeting?
|
|
|
|
So a few guys wrote down their opinions....again, so what? They
|
|
speak for no one but themselves. Just as I speak for no one but myself.
|
|
|
|
You and others like you have come up with a name and shoved into it
|
|
whatever you don't like, then try to convince others that it exists. It's
|
|
as simple as that.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
========
|
|
COMMENT #825796: <poster says this is a rehash of previous
|
|
discussion that got nowhere> <indicates respectful disagreement &
|
|
moves on>
|
|
========
|
|
DATE: SUN SEP 18, 1994 12:29:28 #826218
|
|
|
|
Of course...because you have no facts to back you up.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
|
|
THE CON SUITE: ROBERT BLOCH PASSES AWAY #833044
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 1:09:27 AM
|
|
|
|
Tonight, at 8:30 p.m. Pacific Time, noted author and screenwriter
|
|
Robert Bloch, a good and kind man considered one of the brightest
|
|
lights in his field, passed away from cancer.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 5:23:00 #833584
|
|
|
|
Forrest Ackerman released that information *despite* being asked
|
|
by the family NOT to do so. Everyone respected their decision to have
|
|
this kept private until he passed except Ackerman. They were *very*
|
|
distressed that he released this.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: NO STORY IDEAS, PLEASE #828590
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:20:13
|
|
|
|
Just a reminder not to post or send story ideas for episodes.
|
|
I've just had a flurry of them wind up in my email box, and I've
|
|
had to delete them without reading them, and send cranky notes
|
|
back to the people who sent them. Story ideas open up legal
|
|
liabilities that potentially jeapordize my ability to stay here.
|
|
Please don't send them to me. We're solid for the season at this
|
|
time, and virtually every story for the full five year run is more
|
|
or less plotted out.
|
|
|
|
Thanks for listening.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 SOUNDTRACK INFO #832408
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 3:17:14 PM
|
|
|
|
At this point, the soundtrack wouldn't include the music
|
|
from the pilot in *any* event; the plan at this point is to do
|
|
just the series for now, and maybe the pilot later. And if the
|
|
CD Chris plans to release is the same one as I've got now...it's
|
|
a LOT longer than 40 minutes, closer to 50 or a squidge more.
|
|
He's orchestrated the various cues into one long-playing suite,
|
|
so one flows into the other, and it's a whole piece that plays
|
|
on throughout the CD. I'm very critical about music, and this
|
|
is *real* nice.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 NOVELS? #829686
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994
|
|
|
|
John Vornholt has turned in the first B5 novel to the publisher,
|
|
Dell; Lois Tilton is working on a second, and John will also do a
|
|
third. The first novel, "Voices," should be out around January,
|
|
I'm told.
|
|
|
|
We're doing something kinda unusual with both the novels and
|
|
the comic due out from DC, in that we're trying to keep them in line
|
|
with B5 continuity, so that they can be considered canon at a basic
|
|
level, rather than unrelated throwaways.
|
|
|
|
I'm personally overseeing the novels (just finished my notes on
|
|
John's first book, very light line edits for the most part), as well
|
|
as the comic (in addition to writing the first issue, and providing
|
|
the story arc for the next 8 issues, taken to script by others).
|
|
|
|
It should all be part of the overall story, not just done to make
|
|
some bucks. It takes a little more work, but I think it's important.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:20 #830922
|
|
|
|
Ron Thornton keeps wanting to do a tech manual, so I'm sure it'll
|
|
happen in time. Optic Nerve has already put together an Aliens of B5
|
|
guide for in-house use at this time (with material written by Larry
|
|
DiTillio), which may eventually see the light of day outside the B5
|
|
offices. At present, no role playing games that I know of are in the
|
|
works.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: JESUIT #828594
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:27:24
|
|
|
|
There really is no "Jesuit connection" on B5. While I was raised
|
|
Catholic (sorta), it wore off quickly. But it's something I know about.
|
|
In talking with my spousal overunit Kathryn about this, she also felt
|
|
that if he were as Catholic as I'd made him out to be, he'd probably
|
|
have been trained by Jesuits, the closest things we have to theological
|
|
pit-bulls. It made sense, so that's what he became.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: MATEWAN #831939
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:19
|
|
|
|
Er, actually, this was a reference to a real and traumatic
|
|
strike a number of years ago in a place called Matewan. Different
|
|
place, and a real strike, immortalized in film.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: SEAQUEST DSV OR TNG? #829163
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:17:12
|
|
|
|
Here's comedy for you...I don't think I've ever received
|
|
as many "thank you" notes about Babylon 5 in any 48 hours as
|
|
I did in the 48 hours following the broadcast of the new SeaQuest....
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:14 #831936
|
|
|
|
"Do you make Babylon 5 too?!"
|
|
|
|
No, just Babylon 5, I'm making no other shows at present.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
SF/FANTASY TV: SCHNEIDER RIPS SEAQUEST #830048
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994
|
|
|
|
Hasburgh needs to get a clue, methinks....
|
|
|
|
(And the "baby-in-a-bucket" scene you refer to was one of
|
|
the most moronic things I've ever seen; it guaranteed the kid
|
|
would die, given that we never saw it surface, or give any
|
|
inclination to surface; the only reason the kid survived was
|
|
that SQ was conveniently there...but of course they didn't know
|
|
this. A trash receptacle, sinking to the ocean floor, with NO
|
|
oxygen supply, sealed and airtight...yeah, that's a *real* good
|
|
idea for keeping your kid alive.)
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:16 #830920
|
|
|
|
I really don't watch DS9, and thus don't really have an
|
|
opinion on the writing of the show. The only time I see it
|
|
is if it's on while I'm walking through the room.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 3:14:31 #831284
|
|
|
|
I try when possible to watch the debuts of new SF series, but
|
|
I generally don't have time to watch thereafter; I'm at the studio
|
|
from morning until 7:30, then I write at home until sometimes 3-4
|
|
a.m., with only a break for dinner, so watching *any* TV becomes
|
|
problematic at best. I'm often forced to tape stuff and watch a
|
|
little of it on the weekend. The only shows I try to catch weekly
|
|
are X-Files, TV Nation (when it was on, and let's hope it's renewed),
|
|
and MST3k.
|
|
|
|
I tried to stay with SeaQuest, and made it through about the
|
|
first hour, but finally dived out; I just thought it was dumb and
|
|
juvenile and populated with breathtakingly annoying characters.
|
|
(Just one man's opinion; your mileage may vary.) I wasn't able to
|
|
watch more than about 20 minutes of the new Lois and Clark, but that
|
|
was mainly due to work pressures; I hope to try and catch it again
|
|
this weekend.
|
|
|
|
For my money, X-Files is still one of the spiffier shows on TV.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
SF/FANTASY TV: SAVE ROBO: NEW INFO! #831959
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 12:05:22 AM
|
|
|
|
Word on the street is that it's too late, Robocop has been
|
|
officially canceled.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
---
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:18 #830921
|
|
|
|
"Chrysalis," a cliffhanger of sorts, leads right into "Points
|
|
of Departure," which picks up some of the tables kicked over by
|
|
"Chrysalis," the balance of which are picked up in the second episode,
|
|
"Revelations." By the end of the second new episode, pretty much
|
|
everything is now in place for the rest of the second season...though
|
|
not everything is in quite the same position as it originally was.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 3:14:29 #831283
|
|
|
|
Season two of Babylon 5 is 22 episodes, same as season one.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:08 #829159
|
|
|
|
It's my understanding that Channel 4 has already agreed
|
|
to pick up season two, and it'll probably commence around the
|
|
same time as the American airdates start: November or thereabouts.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829684
|
|
|
|
New B5 episodes will start late October, beginning with
|
|
the last episode of year one, "Chrysalis," followed the next
|
|
week by the season two opener, "Points of Departure."
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #830041
|
|
|
|
There is one more new season one episode remaining to be aired,
|
|
"Chrysalis," which airs mid-late October. This is followed by the
|
|
second season debut, "Points of Departure," a week later.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
STAR TREK: VOYAGER SCRIPT #828589
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:20:06
|
|
TO: SYSOP LEE WHITESIDE
|
|
|
|
We've been pretty good at keeping episode scripts out of
|
|
circulation; a couple have gotten out, but that's about it.
|
|
|
|
What we do plan to do, a bit down the road, is to sell B5
|
|
scripts in a *proper* fashion: those who've written for us and want
|
|
their scripts sold, we'll sell through a still-in-the-planning-stage
|
|
fan liaison office. (If they choose not to have their scripts sold,
|
|
that's fine too.) The original writer will get a ROYALTY from each
|
|
copy sold, just like with a novel. This is frankly how it *should*
|
|
be done...thus, that's how we're going to do it.
|
|
|
|
(Insofar as I know, to the previous message here, Lincoln Enterprises
|
|
does not pay any kind of royalty to the authors of scripts they sell.)
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 3:54:18 #828933
|
|
|
|
Stephen, you say that "there are plenty of ways to
|
|
legally obtain them," and then you cite as examples of
|
|
this "script vendors in the Hollywood area...(and) dealers
|
|
at cons." NEITHER of these are legal, Stephen. The *only*
|
|
legal means is through a studio/production company, and they
|
|
are rather tight with these things.
|
|
|
|
This is a profound misunderstanding on your part.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:05 #829157
|
|
|
|
Actually, the physical script *does* remain the property
|
|
of the writer, even in American TV. The copyright to the
|
|
characters, the story, what's IN the script, is owned by the
|
|
studio/network (making pirating illegal on that level), while
|
|
the physical script is owned by the writer under separation
|
|
of rights (which makes the pirating doubly illegal).
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 12:23:31 #828438
|
|
|
|
Stephen...calm down.
|
|
|
|
This (the matter of scripts floating around at script stores
|
|
and cons and the like) is a very difficult, touchy issue. On the
|
|
one hand...I and any other script-pro loses money, and our copyright
|
|
is violated, every single time one of our scripts ends up in a
|
|
convention bin, photocopied endlessly. On one hand, I take that
|
|
very personally, and when I find it at a convention, I remove the
|
|
copies from the dealer's table. If the dealer has a problem, I urge
|
|
him to call security so that I in turn can press charges against him.
|
|
Because, frankly, they *are* dealing in stolen merchandise. It's no
|
|
different than if someone photocopied the latest Dave Brin novel, and
|
|
was selling the copies at a convention.
|
|
|
|
*On the other hand*....
|
|
|
|
If I step away from my own vested interests for a moment, the
|
|
reality is that it's *very* hard to get one's hand on scripts, in
|
|
order to learn from them. Early in my career, I bought a lot of
|
|
scripts from various script sellers, and at conventions, so that I
|
|
could study them and learn how to write scripts. Even now, when I'm
|
|
at a convention, if I see the script to a show I want to study, to
|
|
see how the writer did it, I'm *very* tempted. Sometimes I give in.
|
|
|
|
Is this a massive contradiction? Absolutely. And I have thus
|
|
far not figured out how to resolve it.
|
|
|
|
The closest I've come is in deciding not to blame the person
|
|
who buys the script, as much as the person who sells it. I've had
|
|
people come up to me at conventions with a copy of the B5 pilot
|
|
script, purchased on the "black market" and ask me to *sign it*. I
|
|
debated for a long time how to handle this, and finally decided to
|
|
do so by signing it, and writing on the front page, THIS IS A
|
|
NON-AUTHORIZED COPY OF THIS SCRIPT, AND IS NOT FOR RESALE FOR PROFIT,
|
|
FOR ANY REASON ON EARTH, THIS IS ONLY (name's) PERSONAL COPY, PERIOD,
|
|
AND IF HE SELLS IT I WILL COME TO HIS HOUSE AND HUNT HIM DOWN LIKE
|
|
THE DOG HE IS.
|
|
|
|
I've found this a *most* effective deterrent.
|
|
|
|
Point being...the person to be yelled at is probably the dealer,
|
|
who knows full well what he's doing, rather than the person who buys
|
|
a script, not entirely aware of the details, only wanting a piece of
|
|
something that he or she experienced and enjoyed.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829685
|
|
|
|
Studios are not licensed to permit ANYONE to sell scripts
|
|
by the author; that is the right of the writer, period, unless
|
|
specifically given in contract (which would violate WGA's agreement).
|
|
Their general right to operate may have been renewed, but that's got
|
|
*nothing* to do with who has the right to sell scripts.
|
|
|
|
And yes, generally speaking scripts can be bought in advance
|
|
of debut at many of these script operations.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829683
|
|
|
|
Very few people, really, would want to read a script
|
|
in script form (in the case of novelizations). The sales
|
|
of the former would be so small as to be negligible, and
|
|
wouldn't cut into the sales of the latter in any real way.
|
|
|
|
Novelization rights are usually purchased with the rights
|
|
to the contents of the script, btw, and are generally controled
|
|
by the studio, as opposed to the physical script, with remains
|
|
with the writer. In the case of B5, we don't intend to do any
|
|
novelizations of scripts in any event, so the question is moot.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: FRI SEP 23, 1994 2:10:01 AM #832059
|
|
|
|
Stephen...several real points of contention.
|
|
|
|
1) Re: people giving the story away to you because they
|
|
read it...how is that any different than people who give the
|
|
story away to you because they saw it, or in a review? I had
|
|
the same problem you did with EMPIRE, not because anyone bought
|
|
the script, but because a stupid reviewer in the San Diego Tribune
|
|
blabbed it all in his review...I was walking into the theater to
|
|
see ROCKY, having scrupulously avoided seeing any kind of reviews
|
|
or articles...and somebody coming out yelled, "ROCKY LOSES!" This
|
|
is really a tangential issue.
|
|
|
|
2) Re: other people not wanting to see the movie because
|
|
X-character dies...again, by the time the movie hits the theaters,
|
|
this information will be running around. What difference is there
|
|
if that person makes up his mind on that basis now, or the day
|
|
before the movie opens? This isn't about script leaks, this is
|
|
about people's eccentricities. You seem to think that if scripts
|
|
aren't available, there will be this huge vacuum, and nobody will
|
|
know anything about a movie until they walk in the door. This
|
|
simply ain't so.
|
|
|
|
3) "When you steal those scripts, you are depriving Lincoln
|
|
of legitimate income." Is it legitimate? Again, the physical
|
|
ownership of a script is the writer's, unless it is specifically
|
|
transferred.
|
|
|
|
4) "Paramount has to hire additional staff to track down
|
|
stolen scripts and enforce confidentiality." To my knowledge,
|
|
Paramount does no such thing. If they do, it doesn't come out
|
|
of the Star Trek production budget in any event.
|
|
|
|
"That's money that could be invested in hiring better
|
|
writers..." Do you think there's a two-tiered system, bad
|
|
writers cost X, good writers cost Y? The Writers Guild determines
|
|
salary minimums, and I don't believe that there is much wide
|
|
divergence in this area over there. "or doing special effects or
|
|
buying that special script from an outside writer."
|
|
|
|
Again, Stephen, as far as I know, ST pays the same rates for
|
|
all scripts that it buys, same as every other show in Hollywood.
|
|
There is no seperate category for "special scripts." Again, the
|
|
WGA determines the price of scripts. What you describe here, as
|
|
above, simply DOES NOT HAPPEN. And, again, any tracking-down of
|
|
scripts and stuff would be done by Paramount Legal Affairs division,
|
|
on behalf of ALL their shows, and would come out of that budget, not
|
|
the show budget. That kind of cross collatorization isn't done,
|
|
because there'd be no way to keep track of it.
|
|
|
|
Some of your points are fairly reasonble, but you don't buttress
|
|
your case by including wild fancy.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
---
|
|
NOTE: RESPONSE TO DIFFERENT POSTER
|
|
---
|
|
DATE: SAT SEP 24, 1994 5:06:01 #833576
|
|
|
|
Of course, at the bottom-line, what you're saying is that if
|
|
someone chooses not to put something on the market, or cannot
|
|
viably do so, then it's okay to steal it, and folks shouldn't
|
|
complain when it happens.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: GILBERT SAYS O'HARE FIRED #829158
|
|
DATE: TUES SEP 20, 1994 8:09:06
|
|
|
|
I'm trying to track down a copy of the tape now, but I've
|
|
heard other characterizations of the interview as not being quite
|
|
so aggressive in this regard, in which she defended O'Hare. This
|
|
is turning into a game of interpretations; once I have the tape
|
|
on hand, this should be clarified.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
=========
|
|
POST #829457: <person who has tape, offers to forward> <states
|
|
that O'Hare was mentioned 1 time, Melissa did not defend him>
|
|
=========
|
|
DATE: WED SEP 21, 1994 #829681
|
|
|
|
Brett: if I can't dig it up elsewhere, yeah, I'll probably
|
|
take you up on that offer. It's not a big thing, frankly, but
|
|
I generally prefer first hand knowledge of stuff, and certainly
|
|
your characterization has usually been spot-on.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
BABYLON 5: B5 IN TV GUIDE... #830919
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 2:50:15
|
|
|
|
...sigh...well, at least they acknowledged our existence
|
|
for a change.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
DATE: THURS SEP 22, 1994 11:51:15 #831937
|
|
|
|
Negative, Electronic Arts let the rights to the B5 game
|
|
lapse; they are now in the hands of Merit Software.
|
|
|
|
jms
|
|
|