brennen
/
lurkers-guide
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 0 Pull Requests 0 Releases 0 Wiki Activity
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.
51 Commits
1 Branch
88 MiB
 
 
 
 
Branch: master
Branches Tags
${ item.name }
Create branch ${ searchTerm }
from 'master'
${ noResults }
lurkers-guide/ftp/GEnie/jms96-01

1283 lines
65 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

Compiled by David Strauss (dstrauss@netcom.com).
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 111 Fri Jan 05, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:44 EST
Atratus: how can I answer that without giving away major story points
from the next 2 years?
Re: Ivanvoa showing up at someone's home in lingerie...darn, just ran
outta pixie dust...imagine that....
Scott: yes, go the Raleigh article; sorry, meant to mention this
before...terminal brain-fart on my part.
Doug: regarding making people laugh until their sides hurt...this is
something I always go for. It's easy to go for the "well, that's amusing"
stuff, but to make someone laugh out loud, or even until it hurts, is tough.
In most (but not all) cases, I try to get one solid laugh per episode, one
moving scene per episode, and one "head-conk" per episode. The first
obligation of a writer is to make you *feel* something, and if I can do that
in an episode, then I've done my job.
It helps in that I'm not generally a big laugher; when I go to plays or
movies with other people, and they're comedies, afterwards I'll always get
"Why didn't you like it?" "I did." "You didn't laugh." "I was just thinking
about how funny it was." Usually I can see a punchline coming, and part of my
brain is racing ahead to what it might be. (And half the time at least I'm
right.) So I've adopted the philosophy that if I find something extremely
funny, other people will laugh at it; if I'm so tickled that I absolutely
laugh out loud, I know it'll probably kill several people. As a result, if
I'm going for a funny scene, I don't leave it alone until I laugh at it.
When I thought about Londo passing out face first on the banquet table
uttering "...but in purple, I'm *stunning*," I just about fell off my chair
laughing. Sometimes I'm a little broad in my comedy, other times I go for
something a little more literate or (one hopes) witty (most of these go to
Ivanova, whereas the broad stuff tends to go to Londo in most cases). But I
try to keep it varied.
Strangely enough, the comics that *do* manage to break me up are all the
more assaultive ones...Jerry Lewis, Robin Williams, Buddy Hackett (who can
reduce me to tears), and a few others.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 135 Sat Jan 06, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:45 EST
Yes, in "Ceremonies" Harlan is the voice of the computer used.
No, have never been on NPR's Fresh Air. Nobody's asked.
Well, reactions have been coming in on the two parter, and so far
everyone's wog-boggled. Peter Jurasik called to say he didn't know what I'm
smoking these days, but to please send ten pounds of it to his house at
*once*. Mumy went nuts over it, everyone's very excited...including and
especially Michael O'Hare, who got his copy of the script today, read it
straight through, and is *extremely* excited by the story, and what happens
with his character, and is VERY much looking forward to the shoot.
BTW, today Walter Koenig and Bill Mumy had a scene together; this (saith
Bill) marks the first time a Lost in Space regular and a Star Trek regular
have acted together in the same scene.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 187 Sun Jan 07, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 23:20 EST
One of the problems we had with the Hugo last year was that whereas only
a couple of TNG episodes were good enough to get nominated, eight B5 episodes
made it to the final cut. Because folks went for their favorite episodes, and
they had a number that year. The result was that the choices got split so
much that TNG won, since it had fewer good or great episodes that season.
("All Good Things" won with, I think, 57 votes; the top two B5 episodes on the
list had 32 and 27 votes between them, enough right there to have won if
combined. That was for "Signs and Portents" and "Chrysalis," with "And the
Sky Full of Stars" at 21, "Babylon Squared" at 19, "Believers" at 10, "Mind
War" at 9, "Voice in the Wilderness" at 8, and "Soul Hunter" at 6.)
So basically, we lost because we had too many solid episodes to choose
from.
As a result, a lot of folks this year have been campaigning to have
participants go for "The Coming of Shadows," which is the highest rated
episode in all the informal polls on-line and elsewhere from that time period.
It's the one nearly everybody seems to agree upon.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 232 Wed Jan 10, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 05:12 EST
BTW, two quickies...I haven't had a chance to read it or buy it yet --
or ANY book lately, or see a movie since May -- but Harlan noted to me lately
that our own Adam Troy-Castro's latest novel is especially spiffy, so folks
here may want to check it out. Also...if you count yourself as *any* kind of
fan of quality SF, then you may want to check out a movie that's SF if you
kinda squint at it a little, and is very likely one of the best movies of its
genre (whatever it is) ever made. I'm referring to SECONDS, starring
(believe it or not) Rock Hudson, a B&W film directed by Frankenheimer when he
was still terrific. I mention it because AMC and Bravo are both showing it on
cable this month, in LETTERBOXED form (which I've never seen before), and it's
just an amazing and disturbing and brilliant and absolutely frightening bit of
film making. If the last two minutes don't give you a case of the screaming
willies for *days* then your cerebral cortex isn't properly installed.
I don't often recommend things, but if you want to see a film that is
just breathtakingly well done and surreal and guaranteed to make the hair on
your arms stand straight up...grab SECONDS this month. It's *NOT* available
on disk or tape insofar as I know, and uncut, in this form, is very rare.
Trust me on this one.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 12
Message 441 Fri Jan 05, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:46 EST
F.Pas...no, you have it correct. I slipped a reference to Babylon 5 into
Power as the genetic engineering facility from which Tank first came.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 12
Message 444 Sat Jan 06, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:46 EST
I guess it's the difference between one show telling you what to think,
vs. another show *asking* you TO think, and what it is that YOU think....
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 12
Message 446 Sat Jan 06, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 19:42 EST
OtherSyde came out with a B5 reference in 1990; B5 was announced as a Go
project, with a description of what it was about, in the trades in November
1991; the DS9 premise was conceived over the following winter, and announced
around January/February 1992. I know the season very well in terms of the
time of year because it was 2 days before Christmas when I got a call from
someone long associated with ST who said, "Joe, are you sitting down? I just
thought you ought to know, it looks like they're going to use a space station
as the regular base for their new Star Trek series." I then called someone
else I know associated with ST and asked if they'd heard this, and got it
verified. The premise was just then being put together, and wasn't formally
given the go-ahead until later in January.)
As it happens, when DS9 was formally announced, it came within inches of
killing B5 in the early stages of pilot pre-production. Warner Bros. was
already very iffy about the syndication marketplace to sustain mor than one
space-oriented SF series; they kept telling us that there isn't really an SF
market, there's an ST market, and if it ain't that, it won't work. What
helped them go along with it was we were based on a space station. When DS9
was announced, and suddenly it wasn't just two SF shows in a marketplace they
thought couldn't sustain more than one, it was two SPACE STATION shows, one of
which had the ST name, and they were sure we were gonna get creamed. To this
day, I suspect that if we hadn't already signed all the contracts, and spent a
lot of the money assigned for prep, with all the announcements in the press,
some folks at WB probably would've pushed hard to stop the B5 project, and
might've even succeeded. That we made it through that is a testimony to a
very few angels at WB and PTEN -- Evan Thompson, Dick Robertson and Gregg
Maday -- who stuck by us at the beginning.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 271 Mon Jan 08, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 15:05 EST
For those who may be interested, here's a list of coming conventions I'll
be attending over the coming months.
Necronomicon (Tampa Oct 11-13), Chicago Comic Con (not invited yet, but I
generally go or try to go every year, June 21-23), San Diego Comic Con (same
deal, July 4th weekend), LosCon (again the same...boy, I ought to work on
this...November 24-26), The Encounter in Blackpool UK (June 7-10), and I'm on
as Guest of Honor at Westercon 50 in 1997.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 276 Tue Jan 09, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:30 EST
Haven't yet been invited to the WorldCon...nobody's said boo.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 281 Tue Jan 09, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 23:56 EST
If one wants to go as a civilian and just watch, there's no need for an
invitation. If the goal is to do a presentation, a panel, whatever, one kinda
has to be invited.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 43
Message 54 Thu Jan 11, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:08 EST
Remember, we're only going to be doing a *few* things to start, just
enough to help make the endeavor self-sustaining. We're not really in the
merchandising business, that's not what we do. It's up to other companies to
do models and the like.
At this point, the list is just pins, patches, Sheridan's EAS AGAMEMNON
cap, maybe some t-shirts, maybe the videos, scripts, Links, and a couple of
other things.
BTW, we cannot produce letterbox at this time, for the simple reason that
we would have to go back to the original negative film stock and re-telecine
all of the prints. We'd have to produce new prints in the original format, re-
edit everything...it's a hideously expensive proposition, and we just don't
have those resources.
When that happens, it'll have to happen through a major video company.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 253 Thu Jan 11, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:02 EST
Actually, having now seen (upon noting this discussion) the two part DS9
episode, it looks to me more like a point-for-point "homage" to SEVEN DAYS IN
MAY...a general who thinks that his president is being soft on preparing for
enemy threats, decides to move his people into position to take over in a
military coup, a lower-level officer (Sisko in the Kirk Douglas role) warning
the president, timing the putch to take place at the time of a major speech
during which instead the general will make his speech instead, code-named
military maneuvers which are supposedly drills but instead are opportunities
for moving military squads into the right position, that same code being
discovered, the general being a patriot by his lights not a traitor, the
general getting boxed in at the last...I could go on, but really, it's SEVEN
DAYS IN MAY right down the line.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 284 Fri Jan 12, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:11 EST
Permission isn't required for pictures currently out there from WB on the
nets (and there are lots of them).
THE BEST MAN? Good heavens, I've discovered a film I hadn't known
existed. I'll try and nail a copy at first opportunity if it's something one
would include in such other august company as FAILSAFE and THE MANCHURIAN
CANDIDATE, both of which are *excellent*.
Re: the Arisia panels...tell you what, Michael...there's bound to be a
moment when it will seem apt to include this...so at that moment, deliver to
the assembled folkses the following message straight from jms:
STAR TREK VS. B5. You who programmed this panel, you who determined
theme and direction, who put the Vs. in the title...have you learned nothing
from experience? Do any of you, who organize conventions and do so out of a
professed love and familiarity with science fiction, remember September 1966?
That was the year a little science fiction series called STAR TREK debuted on
network television, one year exactly after the premiere of LOST IN SPACE in
September 1965. STAR TREK, which was panned by reviewers and fans alike who,
out of a perceived loyalty to the previous show, described it as nothing more
than a cheap attempt to cash in on the success of LOST IN SPACE. LOST was the
established norm, TREK the impudent newcomer, a throwback some said from the
strong family drama of LOST. TREK fans said that this was unfair, that their
show shouldn't have to be compared to LOST IN SPACE, that it should be taken
on its own merit.
"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
There is no STAR TREK VS. B5 except in the minds of those who would
profit from continuing feuds on either side of the fictional picket fence.
Why not CAGNEY & LACEY VS. NYPD BLUE? They're both cop shows. Why is the one
predicated upon the other? What happened to IDIC, Infinite Diversity in
Infinte Combinations? Should it be celebrated only in concept, not execution?
The science fiction community is composed of brilliant dreamers, practical
visionaries, afficianados, costumers, craftspeople...and feuds, in equal
measure. And whichever "side" folks come down on at this panel, B5 or ST,
it's an exercise in factionalization that achieves nothing because there IS no
VS, no OR; it's B5 *and* Star Trek *and* Lost in Space *and* The Prisoner
*and* Space: Above and Beyond. Because the future of science fiction is in
the cross pollinization of ideas, the interbreeding -- after proper
introductions dinners and flowers -- of dreams and visions and extrapolations,
which in time results in the birth of new dreams, new ideas, and new visions.
Absent that, the species, and the genre, dies.
Yes, it is possible to explore, compare and contrast the methods of
storytelling, the effects, the structure and the acting of any two series;
that is the point of the And. In Ali vs. Frasier, the Axis vs. the Allies,
Truman vs. Dewey, OJ Simpson vs. an inconvenient truth, there can only be one
left standing at the end. But in science fiction, we all stand together,
protecting and sharing our diverse dreams, or we do not stand at all.
RE: "B5 is really X in disguise" You're all right, and you're all wrong.
Is it Lord of the Rings? Dune? The Kennedy story? The saga of Camelot? The
Foundation? A brief history of World War II? The Bible? All these and
others have been broached to me by people absolutely sure that this was the
model for the series. (And, as an aside, this kind of discussion generally
happens only to TV writers; nobody here is doing a panel called "Is Startide
Rising Really X in disguise?" This happens to TV writers because somehow it
gets assumed that we haven't got an idea in our heads that we didn't swipe
from somebody's book. But that's another topic for another time.)
Babylon 5...is a Rohrsharch test. An ink blot created by smashing
actors, archetypes, saga-structure, myth and language against a sheet of
paper, folding it, and bashing it a few times. When you open it up and look
inside, what you see is the saga closest to your heart and your experience.
Because like all the works mentioned a moment ago, B5 draws upon the same
wellspring of myth, archetype, symbology, and dime store sociology that feeds
all sagas, from the Illiad on through to the present.
Writers, science fiction writers in particular, are like the beggar in
Alladin, who offered new lamps for old...we seize myths that have fallen out
of currency and recast them in newer guise, dust them off and hope a genie
emerges. Our myths, the myths of Tolkien and Homer, of Heinlein and Mallory,
are eternal; they exchange one name for another, cast off one mask and assume
the next. If you perceive their presence in Babylon 5, it is because we have
courted the myth, not because we have echoed one of their names from another
place. King Lear vanishes into Londo, Cassandra peers out from behind the
eyes of G'Kar, Galahad answers to the name Ivanova, the Oracle at Delphi is
now wearing an encounter suit, and Sir Bedevere is...well, that would be
telling.
So you're all right. And you're all wrong. Because it's all ACTUALLY
based on the 1967 Young Juveniles novel "The Mad Scientists' Club." And I'm
actually channeling Eleanor Roosevelt. (Fortunately, I already have the
wardrobe.) Oh, yes...and I am the walrus, coo-coo ka choo....
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 298 Fri Jan 12, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 17:07 EST
Read it? I *loved* "The Mad Scientists Club" the first time I read it as
a kid. (Never read the follow-up book.) It was just great fun, and very
ingenious. I think I may actually still have that copy somewhere in a box.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 316 Sat Jan 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:16 EST
Re: an "edge" to the show....I suspect you're going to get all the edge
you could possibly want with episodes 8, 9 and especially 10.
Be *very* careful what you wish for.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 288 Sat Jan 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:32 EST
Ruth: and that's one thing that I object to about the worldcons. If a
pro travels to the convention, and appears on panels, which draw the
attendees, which brings money to the convention, then the very *least* the con
should do is provide a free membership. As an example of this, I was
repeatedly asked by folks involved in the recent WorldCon in San Francisco to
come, do a B5 presentation, me and Harlan and one or two others...I wasn't
going to go at first, because I was extremely busy, but finally I relented,
paid my own way up there, showed up at the door to do something they'd asked
me to do...and found out that I had to buy my own membership. My comments in
response do not bear repeating in a public forum, and in any event would
sizzle modem connections anyway.
And the "we'll refund if we show a profit" line is sheerest nonsense;
I've never known a single pro who got his membership reimbursed for a
WorldCon. Some pros I know end up getting booked back to back on panels, they
sign through lunch, they're run ragged for the benefit of the
convention...and they have to pay for the privilege? Where is the logic in
this?
San Diego Comic Con is just as big if not bigger than any WorldCon, and
EVERY PRO who shows up is comp'd into the convention, even if he or she isn't
on a panel. And that is an *extremely* profitable convention. Further, this
small sign of respect entices a LOT more pros to come than might otherwise be
the case. I know a number of SF writers (print and media) and producers who
simply refuse to go to a worldcon on principle, for this very reason.
When I arrived at the San Francisco worldcon, the attitude that I got
when told I'd be paying for my own membership was that I should be thankful
they even let me in the door. They were extremely annoying about it, and very
high-handed. I came within about an inch of turning around and going home;
instead I stayed and did the B5 presentation, but refused to take part in the
other panels they'd scheduled me for, which would've meant heavy-duty
schedules. (And they got downright exercised over my non-attendence, as
though they *had* paid or comp'd me, and they had the *right* to DEMAND I be
there.) The experience absolutely put me off WorldCons, and I haven't been to
one since.
If tomorrow, Worldcon changed its stupid policy (and it *IS* a stupid
policy), what would happen is that you'd get a LOT more pros to attend, on
panels and off, they'd generate more attendees, more goodwill with the SF
community (just ask SFWA how they tend to get treated; there was a big scandal
about facilities provided to them a year or two ago), and they wouldn't lose a
*dime*, if anything they'd make more money due to more folks attending on both
sides. WorldCon has, what, 17-20,000 maximum attending? San Diego Comic Con
gets 20-25,000 and with every single pro comp'd makes a tidy profit each year.
Anybody who says WorldCon can't do it is simply full of it.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 43
Message 59 Sat Jan 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:33 EST
We still have to license 'em from WB; we've been told it shouldn't be a
problem, but we get told that a lot, and 85% of the time it ain't true. We
were told it shouldn't be a problem to get the fan club up and operating in a
few months; that was 2 years ago.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 342 Sat Jan 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 23:50 EST
Actually, we've already *had* ST vs. B5 in sports; our softball team has
played both the DS9 and Voyager teams. We lost to Voyager and whomped the
hell out of DS9.
Here's what was given to the Paramount people, as best I can recall at
this time, I'd have to check the correspondence to be sure: the script for
"The Gathering" pilot movie; eight to ten pieces of original conceptual
artwork done by Peter Ledger helping to explain the concept and giving
character sketches; the series "sell" bible which has NEVER been released to
any writer, it was *only* intended as a device to help explain to studios and
networks the direction and nature of the show; lengthy backgrounds on all of
the characters, and descriptions for the overall direction of the series, and
synopses of about 22 or so planned episodes taken from the overall course of
the planned series. There was a LOT of material.
But let me clarify and reinforce something I said on CIS and elsewhere: I
don't believe that either Berman or Pillar would deliberately take B5 material
and use it. My *only* concern was that in the initial stages of development,
which always receive a great deal of "guidance" from studio execs, that the
execs who DID have the material might have "guided" them in our direction, in
an attempt to co-opt what we were doing for WB/PTEN, because there's great
animosity between those two studios, and out of a desire to protect their
franchise and eliminate any competition by basically absorbing it.
Sometimes it does bother me, and I wonder about what the heck's going on,
when I see the only other space station series doing a big arc about alien
forces infiltrating earth government, and brewing civil war on Earth, at the
*exact same moment* that we're doing it on our show; earlier, later, fine, but
that they'd do basically the same thing at the same time feels like another
attempt to co-opt what we're doing on this show. (Not copy; co-opt, which
happens all the time. Remember Deepstar Six? And another underwater monster
movie released about the same time? Those were both *direct* attempt to co-
opt The Abyss by coming out first. It happens all the time. When Ghost was
in heavy development, every studio in town was scurrying around looking for an
after-life movie to put out fast...I know because I got called in and asked to
come up with something by a major studio...I declined.) If you kinda know the
direction someone else is going, you try to jump ahead and get there first, so
that the other either loses impact, or is considered simply an imitation.
(Which is one reason why DS9 was hurried through post production to get it on
the air a few weeks before B5's pilot, I suspect.)
Are we being co-opted? I dunno. When I hear that there's a red headed
woman character on DS9 named Leeta (prounced the same as Lyta); when I see
them doing the same kind of arc we're doing but getting it out a little
earlier, I will confess it does give me pause sometimes. I try to think the
best under these conditions. For now, I'm asuming it's all just coincidence.
(Oh, and as for scripts vs. production times...we are generally far ahead
of most shows on scripts, about 4 episodes ahead of production at any moment.
So this next batch of scripts was probably written around August, at which
time they're circulated over town to agents and the like as part of casting.
So I find it *highly* improbable that these DS9 episodes were written in June,
knowing how close to the wire they tend to run over there.)
And, really, on another level, it's clear that they weren't ripping off
B5 with this two-parter...I will defend that to the death by virtue of the
clear logic that they're *really* ripping of SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. As for the
timing...well, we'll see.
(This is something else that happens a lot in TV; a writer will say,
"Okay, let's do FLIGHT OF THE PHOENIX with Jessica Fletcher in the Henry Fonda
role.")
Finally, re: Jeri Taylor...here I have to disagree. Though we don't talk
as often as we should, or as I'd like, in large measure I think because of the
perceived awkwardness between ST and B5 right now, I consider her not only a
friend, but one of the best writer/producers in town. This isn't widely
known, but she was my exec producer, with David Moessinger, on JAKE AND THE
FATMAN. We worked together very closely, and I found her to be an immensely
talented woman, very dedicated to quality storytelling, ethical and strong
willed and generous to a fault. When she and David resigned from Jake on
principle, over some stuff that was happening quite unfairly to them, I quit
with them, even though it was my very first real network major gig, and my
agent thought I was nuts. I don't do this for everybody. I did it for Jeri
and David because they are good and decent people, because I cared about them,
and because they were *right*...and they're two of the best writers I know.
If there's a problem with Voyager -- and I'm not saying there is, because
I haven't seen enough of it to form a valid opinion -- it's due to the
situation that has always pertained to ST: they make the writers there write
with mittens on, and won't let them cut loose with the kinds of stories they
COULD do, for fear of doing something controversial that might hurt "The
Franchise." I've said it elsewhere and will repeat it again: I know the folks
they've got over there, and if Paramount ever backed off and let them do what
they're *capable* of doing, they'd blow the doors off of SF television.
So long story made short...no, I don't think B&P at DS9 are sitting there
cribbing B5 plotlines from the original material provided to Paramount. I
think they would refuse. They are ethical individuals. Are they playing a
little at co-opting us, which is kind of more accepted in town? I don't know.
I think you could make a compelling argument on either side. But I don't know
the truth any more than you do, and if they say not, then I'm prepared to
believe them. And as for Jeri, anybody here goes after her, has to go through
me first.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 358 Sun Jan 14, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 19:07 EST
Re: the Hugos...I would not tend to consider the entirety of season two
as one dramatic unit because it's written by diverse hands, many different
writers. I think you'd have to have an entire season written by one writer,
as a whole and undiluted dramatic unit, for that season to be eligible....
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 370 Mon Jan 15, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:43 EST
Re: history...there's a line I came across somewhere, "I have 25 more
years of experience than you do." "No, you just have one year of experience,
repeated 25 times."
Mike: that's a *great* report from Arisia, thanks; glad to hear it all
went well. (And yes, of course, feel free to email the comments around;
anybody else wants to use them, that's fine too.) To your notion (ah, the
birth of a notion) that current B5 fandom resembles the original ST
fandom...there may be something to that, I think. In any event, thanks
again....
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 390 Tue Jan 16, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:41 EST
Well, guess what...this week's new TV GUIDE had a cover story on Science
Fiction TV...big coverage to ST, X-Files, Space A&B, Xena and Hercules...but
absent one sentence containing an offhand reference to B5 in an article on the
upcoming Osiris Chronicles...nothing about B5. Zippo. Period. Nada.
About what I expected.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 301 Sat Jan 13, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 23:15 EST
Sharon, my main point was primarily that if a pro is invited to a
worldcon, or asked to perform on a panel or give a presentation, then that pro
should be comp'd. The SDCC "every pro is comp'd" rule is great, but I'm not
going to shove it down anybody's throat. This, though, should be the minimum
requirement.
You lock yourself into a box otherwise. Okay, you comp more pros, you
lose those memberships...but suddenly there are MORE pros -- again, there are
many who just won't attend on principle over all this -- and this will draw
more attendees to SEE those pros. If that pro brings in just *one* more
person who might not otherwise have attended, then it's a wash, is it not? On
the flip side, you *don't* comp pros, so many don't come, so there are fewer
folks drawn to the con, and less money is made.
The policy is, frankly, counter-productive and stupid. And, frankly,
insulting to most of the pros I've spoken to about this subject. It's okay to
have them as draws, to get the folks in the door, but respect their efforts by
at least not requiring them to pay for the privilege of being asked to
perform? Not a chance.
And yeah, ConFrancisco *did* leave a bad taste in my mouth. I was
treated rudely. When I said that after coming all this way, on my own dime,
at their request, and being denied admission, I was half inclined toward just
turning around and going home, what I got was a shrug and a laugh..."Okay,
fine, go, we've got plenty of other pros here. We really don't need you if
we've got the others." So I did the one B5 presentation -- because I knew a
lot of fans were expecting it, and would be otherwise disappointed -- but
basically boycotted the rest of the convention, for which I'd paid full price.
If, tomorrow, all the pros said, "Screw it, if we have to pay to go to a
convention that wants us to *work* while we're there, we're just not going,"
then the day after tomorrow there would be a *new* policy that pros asked to
work at the WorldCon would be comp'd...and the cons would go on just fine.
Because without the pros...you don't HAVE a convention.
I guess the reason I take such personal umbrage at this is because when
I'm asked to be at a convention, I bust my butt to serve the convention. At
the recent UK convention I attended, it wasn't just "do your one presentation
or panel and coast," I was down hanging out with fans in the lobby, sitting
and talking...I was in the main ballroom, personally rearranging chairs to
make sure there weren't any bad seats, since there were posts in the way and
those setting up hadn't taken that into consideration...I signed autographs
for 3 hours straight, working the line up the stairs when people started to
get faint from the heat, signing about 2,000 autographs in two days, with the
rule that NOBODY got turned away who wanted one, no matter how long it
took...I attended presentations I wasn't in...and when I go up on stage
finally I fight like crazy to make every second as interesting and fun as I
can, because *that's my obligation to the convention, and the people who came
all this way to be there*. They expect, and should receive, nothing less than
absolute satisfaction.
I lose over 5 pounds every time I do a two-day convention, because I'm
constantly on the run, trying to make sure everybody's having a good time. I
do this for the cons where I'm the "big shot main guest," and I do as much of
it as I can when I'm just one more invited guest (without being intrusive or
getting into somebody else's spotlight, which is wrong). Given all that, I
don't think it's too much to ask to be comp'd into the convention.
See, the money, for me, ain't the issue. I can afford the ticket, that
ain't no big deal. (As for WB paying the freight...now THAT'S comedy.) It's
the *principle* of the thing that bothers me. The science fiction field is a
direct result of the efforts of its writers, creating new and exciting visions
of the future, the past, and our possibilities. It seems to me that those
who do so should be accorded a minimum of respect for their efforts in a
massive celebration of the genre.
And yes, I do know the history of the worldcons, albeit not as
extensively as others might. And when they began, they were mainly just pros
getting together in a sort of private club environment, along with a
relatively small portion of fans. Now, however, it's become a fairly big
industry, lots of fans come from all over the world to attend, major
publishing companies buy booths and exhibit space, movie and TV studios
participate...it's Show Business now. But the same mindset from the early
days still is being applied...and SF folks, more than anyone else, should know
the peril in applying old logic to a changing world.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 324 Mon Jan 15, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 22:55 EST
Sharon, you're engaging in the politics of distraction. You keep
broadening out the argument...now it's drink chits, and the green room, and
programs. Let's deal with one thing at a time, shall we? (And I think most
pros would be happy to let go of the $2 drink chit in exchange for the $100
admission fee, don't you?)
Perianne just gave us a very good breakdown: 200 program participants at
$100 apiece being $20,000. Are you saying that worldcons are so fiscally
unstable that they can't handle this? What happens to the ads paid for in the
program booklet from book companies and movie studios and TV shows and authors
and artists? Where is that money going? When the studios and the publishers
and others pay for booth space and exhibits, doesn't that go into the kitty?
If you were *just* making the money on ticket sales, then maybe you might have
an argument...but there are revenue streams coming in from a LOT of places,
from institutions with big bucks, who are there because the pros are there.
Here's a question...when was the last time a WorldCon was audited?
Because if they're that financially unsound, maybe something should be looked
into about their books. There's probably a great deal of waste in there. I
bet we could find out where the problem is...or, perhaps, determine that
they're not this fiscally unstable after all, which would certainly be in
everyone's interest, would it not?
The reason I bring this up is that, well, I work in *Hollywood*, and out
here we've learned that ON PAPER, the studios make absolutely sure that
nothing ever shows a profit, to avoid paying participants. I know full well
how figures can be balanced, juggled, cross-referenced and buried. So the
question becomes...if the WorldCon is a function for the SF and fan
contingents, to whom is the WorldCon accountable (literally and figuratively)
for its fiscal activities? Is it just WorldCon folks monitoring WorldCon
folks? Is each separate division allowed to monitor its own books without
supervision by any other WorldCon? If so, then we enter the "Who Watches the
Watchmen?" scenario.
If you say, "The WorldCon can't afford to comp participating pros," then
it seems to me not unreasonable to say, "Okay, I will accept that if you will
show me that this is the case." Otherwise why should we take anyone's word
for this? You are eliciting $20,000 in fees from pros who would be comp'd at
*virtually any other convention in the country*. This is truly extraordinary.
One of a kind. I see nothing wrong with asking for support, evidence and
proof as to why this is necessary.
A proper audit would compare actual fees received, plus revenue from t-
shirts, programs, exhibit space, and other areas, with "soft" revenue in the
sense of hotel facilities provided free or at reduced cost as part of a
package deal, trade-offs, barter, and real costs on facilities, free rooms for
various individuals (convention top organizers doubtless get free rooms under
the package deal), and so on...and in so doing put this issue fully and
completely to rest.
So...to whom *are* the WorldCons answerable...?
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 43
Message 62 Sun Jan 14, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 05:19 EST
Broadcast networks are still adamently opposed to LBX broadcasts 'cause
most folks have small TVs and would tune out. (A lot of folks who spring for
cable tend to have larger TVs, so it works a bit better there.) A network
suit once told me, "We program for people who can't afford cable or tapes or
disks."
Re: licensing...yes, since WB owns the copyright to B5 (just as Paramount
owns the copyright to ST), we have to license back anything we want to sell.
No, the German and French stations have not been broadcasting in
widescreen, but have been negotiating for the right to do so in year 3.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 19, Topic 42
Message 14 Tue Jan 16, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:56 EST
Since the universe is curved, there cannot be any truly straight answers.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 416 Wed Jan 17, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:51 EST
RE: B5 costs...generally, under $900,000 per episode.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 336 Wed Jan 17, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:57 EST
At this point, I think I'd opt not to get into discussing ways to get the
film/TV companies involved more in SF fandom and the like, because sooner or
later that'd lead me back to the Dramatic Nebula discussion, and if we even
get *near* that one you would see a flamefest that would make the firebombing
of Dresden look like a tea party by comparison.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 443 Thu Jan 18, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 03:29 EST
Actually, as I recall, it's "Even a man who is pure at heart, and says
his prayers by night, may become a wolf when the wolfsbane blooms, and the
moon is full and bright." Maria Ospenskaya.
Part of the problem with American culture is that we're a throwaway
culture...yesterday's fashions get tossed out instantly. To say that TNG or
DS9 are *better* shows than TOS because TOS was "of its time," or "good for
its time" is at heart a foolish statement. Something is good, or it is not
good. Nobody writes like Shakespeare anymore; was Shakespeare good "for its
time?" Is it not good today because it is too much "of its time?" Chaucer?
Marlowe? Hemingway? Dickens? Serling?
We denigrate our past to falsely ennoble our present. "Well, that was
okay for *then*, but it's not very good *now*." We all labor under the rules
and predelications of the moment. Yes, TOS operated under rules of that time,
just as TNG operates under the rules of syndication, and the secondary and
tertiary rules that come along with the fear of not botching the franchise by
doing anything too controversial. One could make a good argument that, by
calcification and commercialization, there are MORE creative strictures on
the ST "form" than there were in the days of TOS; certainly most of the
writers who've worked on the contemporary versions will tell you this.
Nonetheless, we should recognize that people aren't just stupid en masse
one year, then suddenly smarter today. If TOS was good, then it was good;
*we* may have changed, but the quality of the show as perceived then, is still
there.
End of sermon.
Tentative title for #319: "Grey 17 Is Missing."
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 481 Fri Jan 19, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:06 EST
Yeah, I know Alan. We're more casual acquaintances than friends.
"All television has improved...." I'm sorry, I can't believe anyone
actually wrote that sentence with a straight face. Overall, like the rest of
society, television has become *less* literate, *less* sophisticated than it
was in the early years. Sure, we can now make genitalia jokes on Married With
Children...but it that more sophisticated? Where I come from, sophistication
means smart, witty, urbane, worldly. That doesn't describe the majority of
contemporary TV.
The majority of current television programs produced currently are
sitcoms, the majority of which are, to me, unwatchable...I see very little of
the genuine humor of, say, the Dick Van Dyke show, or the sophistication of
MASH. A few -- Cybil, the Simpsons, a handful of others (and AbFab if you get
cable) -- are quite funny, but frankly, were it not for laugh tracks, I think
about 70% of sitcom writers would be out of business.
When it comes to drama...point out to me who out there is doing work on a
par with Reginald Rose or Rod Serling or Paddy Chayefsky...where on TV can you
find hour or 90 minute plays like "Requiem For a Heavyweight" or "Marnie" or
"Patterns?" Is there good stuff being done today? Yes, of course there
is...there's just *less* of it around in drama mainly because the networks do
all they can do dumb down a show to make it more accessible.
(A network suit actually *said* thsi to me: "Our operating philosophy
these days is that the people with upper or middle-class incomes, and an
education, are watching cable, or laser disks, or videotapes. So what we have
to do is to program for the rest of the audience, who may be under educated,
but don't have any other options." Scared the hell outta me.)
When I was working on JAKE AND THE FATMAN (no defense offered), I had a
script I'd written about a cop who's been trying to nail a certain bad guy for
the last 10 years. I had a line in that when they meet: the bad guy says, "I
suppose I should be flattered. Not every man has his own, personal Ahab." A
pretty spiffy line.
The network calls. "We think there's a typo; there's a character
referenced named Ahab, but we don't see him anywhere else in the script." My
exec tries to explain to the network suit...see, it's Ahab...Captain
Ahab...you know, MOBY DICK...a nut chasing a big fish...?" The network guy
says, "Look, I have an MBA [I think we already see part of the problem here -
jms] and if I don't know who Ahab is, nobody else is going to, so cut it out
of the script." And so it went, over my strongly stated objections.
Has some TV gotten better? Yes. Has some TV gotten worse? Most
definitely. But to say that "ALL television has improved" is, frankly, one of
the most astonishingly inaccurate statements I've seen in years. That means
there are no gaggles of talk shows parading our eccentricities in phosphor-dot
parades day and night; no infomercials; no "America's Goofiest Videos"....
There's more material out there, but as is the rule with just about
everything, 90% of everything is crap, to quote Sturgeon. If you have a pile
of 100 things, then 10 of them are great; if you have a pile of 1,000 things,
you can say there are now 100 great things where there were once only 10...but
one can also turn around and say that there are now 900 crappy things were
there were once only 90.
To the question uptopic about golden-age SF...I would be lying through my
teeth if I said I wasn't strongly influenced by the look and feel of golden
age SF, and that this has filtered into the show to one extent or another.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 534 Sat Jan 20, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 20:33 EST
Re: the notion that there are 7 basic stories...this isthe sort of
thing academics come up with because they feel this compulsive need to
categorize creativity and break it down into digestible pieces. It is, of
course, sheerest nonsense, and the usual descriptions they try to apply (man
vs. man, man vs. environment, man vs. god, man vs. self) are so broad as to be
essentially meaningless. There ARE no set numbers of stories or story types.
Stories, at their best, are based around characters, and what that specific
character wants, how far he is prepared to go to get it, and how far someone
else will go to stop him. Thus, there as many types of stories as there are
types of people...endless and varied.
There's a post-script to the Moby Dick story...subsequent to the events
described, I send the suit in question a copy of Moby Dick...in comic book
form (Classics Illustrated). Something he could handle.
To those who inquired, other TZ episodes I wrote: THE WALL, DREAM ME A
LIFE, ACTS OF TERROR, THE MIND OF SIMON FOSTER, THE CALL, SPECIAL SERVICE,
RENDEZVOUS IN A DARK PLACE, and co-written...THE CURIOUS CASE OF EDGAR
WITHERSPOON (w/Barkin), THE TRANCE (w/Stuart) and OUR SELENA IS DYING, story
by Serling, script by jms.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 546 Sun Jan 21, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 07:03 EST
I know Mark Halperin's work, though I haven't read that much of it. I
enjoy reading fiction, but due to the nature of the job, I don't have much
time for it just now. (Simply producing the show would be an 18 hour a day
job; just writing all the eps so far would be a 16 hour a day job...somewhere
in here I have a serious math problem.) These days, I find myself more
reading nonfiction...biographices, collections of essays, historical works,
(that should read biographies above), that sort of thing, when I have time,
which is rarely. Tried, with minor success, to plow through Hunter Thompson's
latest...I've got Vach's Batman novel on my pile to read, some other
stuff...but there just isn't time for most of it.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 601 Mon Jan 22, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 18:43 EST
Everyone knows the *proper* way to ascii a raspberry is pfthpft....
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 606 Mon Jan 22, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 21:23 EST
Today was a very interesting day; today Michael O'Hare returned to the
Babylon 5 stages in preparation for shooting the two-parter, which begins
tomorrow. Today he came by for his wardrobe fitting and to get his hair
trimmed, say hi to folks, and hang out...lunch was me, John Copeland, Michael
and Bruce Boxleitner eating together at one of the tables in the lunch area
behind the stage, lots of laughing and kidding, and the two get on great.
(Turns out they'd worked on other projects before, including the short-lived A
Rumor of War series by Sterling Siliphant.)
Anyway, it's a great atmosphere, and everybody's psyched for the two-
parter. It's like he never went away.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 359 Sat Jan 20, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 20:36 EST
Of course, it ain't just the media and comic cons that comp pros who
participate on panels...EVERY fan-run convention in the country that I know of
comps participating pros...Westercon, Loscon, Icon, Baycon, you name it.
Some of them are big cons, some of them are small or medium cons; they all do
the same. It's only WorldCon that breaks the pattern, thus one must ask for
justification.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 362 Sun Jan 21, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 07:14 EST
I'd also point out that Westercon is also a convention held in different
places each year, sometimes in Seattle, or Portland, or Los Angeles, or
Anaheim, or elsewhere.
Had an interesting phone call from a *very* highly regarded SF pro this
evening, prompted by this discussion. I pass along one of the statements the
pro made without comment, because I don't know the area this far behind the
scenes well enough *to* comment...it's this person's experience with decades
in fandom and working as a pro.
What the pro said was basically this: "What they *don't* want anybody to
know is that the WorldCons bring in huge amounts of money...which the con
wastes on mismanagement, poor planning, and endless beer parties for staffers,
buddies, and others. They run it like amateurs and fans, who are so lost in
their politics and insular worldview that they don't run it like the big event
it really is, a *business*...with the result that it's the fan and pro
communities that end up picking up the tab. The SMOFs who run these things
get so bogged down in their politics that they'd rather do things the dumb,
expensive way than the smart way because somebody else wants to do it that
way." (I'm assuming SMOFs means Secret Masters of Fandom, but didn't ask for
clarification.) "A number of us in and out of SFFWA have been fighting this
for over 25 years. But when you say this to them, when you say that the
problem is mismanagement at the top, they *crucify* you. So nothing gets
done."
Once again, I have no way of knowing how valid this opinion might be; so
don't kill the messenger. I pass it on for discussion and reaction.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 376 Sun Jan 21, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 19:04 EST
Sharon, don't you see what it is you're saying? If one brings up
ComicCon, you say, "Well, they're bigger than we are, we can't do things the
same way they do;" if one brings up Westercon, you say, "Well, they're smaller
than we are, we can't do things the same way they do." I know this isn't your
intent, but it comes off as backing and filling, that nothing can ever be
done, no criticism can be made validly. And the discussion keeps being pushed
to extremes to bolster a failing point; if one says, they should be better
organized, you come back with the notion that they can't and shouldn't be run
like Creation Cons. Nowhere was that said. Must a con be run as a CC to be
run well? Of course not. So that makes the response seem very transparent,
as others have noted. There IS a middle ground. I just keep sensing a real
lack of interest in many (but not all) associated with WorldCons to *find*
that middle ground.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 26
Message 384 Mon Jan 22, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:23 EST
If I'm running a business, and it goes belly-up, or fails to show a
profit, if I then turn to the people who put up the money for it and said,
"Well, sorry, but after all, we're just amateurs," they'd nail my feet to the
floor and beat the crap outta me. And they'd be right in doing so.
So far a number of people have come forth to say, frankly, that the
WorldCons *do* suffer from frequent mismanagement, waste, the lack of
continuity, and the fact that as "amateurs" they can't be expected to run
things well.
This is a defense...? In what alternate universe?
Wouldn't it be smart, for instance, if the WorldCon committee hired an
outside business consultant, someone who *wasn't* an amateur, who could work
with each individual committee to provide continuity between cons, advise on
areas where mistakes had been made before, and suggest ways in which the cons
might be made to run more efficiently, and profitably, and sensibly? The cost
of such an advisor would be *minimal* compared to the funds recouped by a
leaner, more efficient, and more profitable operation. You'd make back that
fee a hundred fold. If there's general agreement that there *are* problems,
why not address them and fix them, instead of making the fan and pro
communities pay for the continuance of the problem?
(And yes, I have heard that LACon *will* be comping memberships for
participating pros, which by itself takes care of the assertion that it cannot
be done. Obviously it *can* be done. I know that some involved have gotten a
lot of email because of the discussion here, echoed on other nets, and I don't
know if it's had an impact, but either way, it's a Good Thing.)
Fans of the SF genre tend to describe those outside the genre as
"mundanes," and pride themselves on being smarter than the general population
(which is, to varying extents, probably true)...doesn't it seem strange that a
fan community which prides itself on being technologically and scientifically
smarter, on being on the leading edge of computer tech and genetics and other
areas, would choose to remain uninformed or less than capable about financial
areas? If the same attention were put on this area, as is on the others, all
parties concerned would be better served.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 395 Sat Jan 27, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 01:33 EST
I'd also point out that the film as it shows up on the stations is quite
a bit different from what I get in my master SVHS copies, and off the D1
masters. Once we deliver the episode, it goes through several dubbing
processes by WB, one to insert commercials (where sometimes we get clipped,
and we sometimes get weird audio and video burbles, we get crunched, sometimes
there's analog/digital conversion going on), and then AGAIN when the episode
is copied again for closed-captioning purposes. Then a new "master" is
struck for uplink. During this process, I've seen a distinct increase in
graininess, it's a bit less sharp, and you get some odd stuff with audio being
out of phase.
It's nothing we can control, it's the facilities used by PTEN for
translation of the episode for broadcast.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 409 Sat Jan 27, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 18:54 EST
Yes, I also like the more shadowy shots, which add a great deal of
texture to the show.
When we go to do the videotapes for the fan club, we're tentatively
planning to go to the same company that did the dupes from masters for the
tape we did for the Television Academy, back when nominating time came around.
They were very good quality, on a par with the standard VHS copies I get
personally. (I certainly couldn't tell any difference.)
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 418 Sun Jan 28, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 04:43 EST
Right now, the plan, tentatively, is this: we would announce that say,
the first 8 episodes will be made available in a limited edition. We would
take orders for that first batch for a specific period, say 30 days. We would
then produce the tapes in the number ordered, and that would be it for a
while, while we moved onto the next series of episodes (9 through whatever).
After working our way through the total available number of episodes, we'd
eventually work our way back to #1 again, though it might take as much as a
year, and subsequent editions would be noted as such.
This is still open to change, but that's what we're considering.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 427 Sun Jan 28, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 18:03 EST
We hope to have a web site set up for the fan club soon, so that will be
a point of registration.
Re: widescreen...I've noted this before...we would have to go back and re-
telecine the film stock back to its original format for every frame of film,
which would cost upwards of $250,000 up-front, and we don't have that
capacity. That could only be done when a major player comes in to distribute
disks.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 455 Tue Jan 30, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 02:53 EST
We do not expose incorrectly, or inadequately. If anything the show is
lighter than it was in the first season. The element you point to, the slow-
motion drop of the detonator, took on a grainy look because it was slowed down
artificially, it wasn't shot at that speed, it was done in post. (Most of our
slow-mo is done in-camera; some isn't.)
CGI, direct to video or D1, is always going to look "cleaner" than film.
(Initially, on Space, they output their CG to film rather than
video...eventually they changed this because of the costs involved, which are
considerable) It's not that the film is grainier than it would be under other
circumstances; it's that the CG is cleaner than the norm.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 479 Thu Feb 01, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 00:50 EST
Don't forget he also had the inherent momentum he carried with him from
the fast-moving shuttle.
BTW, though I announced this elsewhere, I've finally finished the
revisions to my writing book, The Complete Book of Scriptwriting, which was
initially published in 1981, revised a bit, and has now been TOTALLY
rewritten, stem to stern, is almost double the original length, and has many
new chapters on technology and writing, the WGA, animation, traps, and other
areas, in addition to the chapters on film, TV, stage, radio and the like.
It's absolutely current now, and contains samples of various script forms,
agent forms, contracts, lists of all sorts, and tentatively I'm planning to
include a B5 script in the book, probably "The Coming of Shadows." It'll be
published with much ballyhoo in the Fall as THE (EVEN MORE!) COMPLETE BOOK OF
SCRIPTWRITING.
BTW, tentative title for episode #20, "And the Rock Cried Out, No Hiding
Place."
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 1
Message 482 Thu Feb 01, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 05:08 EST
I'm mentioning it here because it hasn't been mentioned elsewhere here
that I've seen, and because it's something pivotal to me, and my upbringing,
and the formation of my personality. And because you ought to know about it
if you don't already.
The other day, Jerry Siegel -- half of the team of Siegel and Shuster,
creators of the most widely known character ever to come out of comics, one of
the five most recognizeable characters on the planet (this by a survey not
long ago) -- passed away, following his partner Joe a few years earlier.
Jerry and Joe created Superman. I didn't have the honor or pleasure of
ever getting to meet them, but everything I have ever heard has shown them to
be decent, kind, generous people who got screwed out of their fair share in
the character who became a billion dollar industry. Bill Mumy, who is as much
a comics fan as I am, maybe moreso, had Jerry over to dinner once, with Bob
Kane and Jack Kirby; it was the night of his life. Jack is also gone, but
this is about Jerry. And it's about Superman.
I collect only a few things. Watches. I like watches. I don't have a
lot, but more than 3 is a collection, I'm told. Comics, sure, I got about
10,000 comics, most in storage, a lot in my office at home. But I've always
considered myself a comics reader, not a comics collector.
I *collected* Superman stuff. And I have one of the best collections on
the Western Seaboard: bronze rings from the 1940s, pinbacks, patches, mugs,
pins, figurines, Supermen of America membership badges, a cape made from the
original bolt, to the original patterns, as that made for George Reeves...you
name it, I got it.
Because when I was a kid, Superman was It. Because of that singular
character -- invulnerable, unstoppable, whose single goal was to find the
right thing and do it -- I decided that I could do anything I set my mind to
doing. Truth, justice, and the American way. Yeah, it's corny as hell, and
maybe it doesn't parse too well in a "stick it to 'em" society, but as a kid,
it *meant* something to me. Okay, I grudgingly accepted that I couldn't
fly...but otherwise, if I decided I wanted to do it, then by god I *could* do
it. If that meant teaching myself to read at an early age, or dealing with
the great personal angst of a family life that was dysfunctional on the best
of days, for which invulnerability was a quality much to be desired...or
deciding that someday I was gonna be a Writer, then that was what was going to
happen.
And to this day, my only agenda is to try and find the right thing, as
best as I am able to perceive the right, and do it. Because when you're a kid
you're young and foolish enough to believe there IS a Right Thing; you just
have to dig long enough and think hard enough and survive the kryptonite long
enough to figure it out. And you don't lie, you don't sell out your friends,
you put yourself on the line, and anybody who wants to hurt your friends has
to go through you first.
These are the lessons learned by a kid; they are tempered with time, but
they still shape the adult.
When you start as a nearsighted kid, who doesn't fit in with the new
school (and there was always a new school every 6-12 months), who believes he
just might have a little nascent talent waiting to come out, tall and gawky,
with stars in your eyes and a home life that would make the Borgias seem like
a tea party...how much of a leap is it really to see Clark Kent in the mirror,
and anticipate Superman...?
Maybe it's maudlin, maybe it's indulgent. Maybe it's over-wrought, and
maybe it's silly. But the concept and the character of Superman meant
something to me as a kid. Still does. And now the man who created Superman
is gone, and somebody ought to say something, however silly or indulgent or
maudlin it might be seen by others.
Because it's the right thing to do.
Thanks, Jerry.
Bye. Give my regards to Joe. And Kandor. And Krypton. And Jor-El.
And Lara. What you created, endures. Rest easy.
jms
------------
SFRT II RoundTable
Category 18, Topic 2
Message 452 Wed Jan 31, 1996
STRACZYNSKI [Joe] at 19:32 EST
No, that's not the intent; but this is the time when stations make their
decisions about what shows they're going to pick up, and each year you get a
LOT of new shows out with a lot of hype and heat, and it's possible for a show
that's been around for a bit, middle of the road, to just sorta get forgotten
about in the crush. So it never hurts for fans to remind the station owners
what they want.
jms