brennen
/
lurkers-guide



								                            [1][ISMAP]-[2][Home]


								    ### GUIDE ### [3][Background] [4][Synopsis] [5][Credits] [6][Episode

								                       List] [7][Previous] [8][Next]


								   _Contents:_ [9]Overview - [10]Backplot - [11]Questions - [12]Analysis

								   - [13]Notes - [14]JMS


								     _________________________________________________________________


								Overview


								     A sharp increase in raider activity has the station on the

								     defensive. Londo obtains a priceless Centauri artifact. A

								     mysterious stranger visits the station's alien ambassadors.

								     [15]Gerrit Graham as Lord Kiro. Fredi Olster as Lady Ladira. [16]Ed

								     Wasser as Morden.


								   (Originally titled "Raiding Party")

								Sub-genre: Action/intrigue

								[17]P5 rating: [18]9.01


								Production number:  116

								Original air date:  May 18, 1994


								Written by J. Michael Straczynski

								Directed by Janet Greek


								     _________________________________________________________________


								Backplot


								     * The Minbari refused to support Babylon 5 until Commander Sinclair

								       was named as the Earth Alliance representative.

								     * The emperor of the Centauri hasn't been seen in public for some

								       time, contributing to an erosion of the government's credibility

								       in the eyes of the Centauri populace.


								Unanswered Questions


								     * Who or what is Morden, and who does he represent?

								     * What do Delenn and Kosh know about him?

								     * Why did the Minbari want Sinclair in charge of the station?

								     * How big and organized are the raiders?

								     * What impact will the Eye have on Londo's career? Will he even

								       return it to the Emperor, or will he try to use it for his own

								       gain?

								     * How did Mr. Reno get his hands on the Eye?

								     * How did Morden's associates locate the raiders and recover the

								       Eye?

								     * Who will escape on the shuttle in Ladira's vision? When will the

								       vision come true, if ever, and what will the circumstances be?


								Analysis


								     * Delenn and Kosh clearly have some sort of perception beyond normal

								       senses, be it telepathy or something else. Kosh's seems to be much

								       more advanced.

								     * Delenn's perception seems to be connected to the appearance of the

								       triangle on her forehead. Note that this triangle was also present

								       when Sinclair was interrogated by the Grey Council at the Battle

								       of the Line (cf. [19]"And the Sky Full of Stars.")

								     * Kosh recognized what Morden was immediately. That suggests

								       previous contact between the Vorlons and Morden's people.

								     * Kosh said, "They are not for you," referring to humans, though

								       that's not completely clear from the episode itself. (See [20]jms

								       speaks)

								     * Morden and Kosh appeared to have fought, resulting in the damage

								       to Kosh's encounter suit. Since Morden continued to go about his

								       business, perhaps Kosh capitulated or lost the fight, or perhaps

								       he was only interested in stopping Morden from seeing Sinclair.

								       One interesting thing about this alleged fight is the light that

								       shatters behind Morden as the scene ends -- just a power surge

								       from the attack, or something else at work?

								     * Babylon 5 may be destined for destruction, apparently with only a

								       single shuttle escaping in time. (cf. [21]"Babylon Squared")

								     * Where did Morden's disembodied voice come from at the end?


								Notes


								     * This episode has the most complex battle sequence to date,

								       spanning nearly an act and a half.

								     * The raider on Babylon 5 is "Six," a tip of the hat to "The

								       Prisoner."

								     * Ed Wasser, the actor who played Morden, also appeared as the main

								       C&C technician in the pilot movie, [22]"The Gathering." The same

								       character? JMS won't say.

								     * As Sinclair and Garibaldi left the lavatory, another person

								       entered. From the person's appearance, it seemed to be a woman,

								       even though they were leaving the men's room (the "Male" symbol

								       was clearly visible on the wall outside.)

								     * This episode's title may be a nod to Norman Corwin, one of JMS'

								       favorite writers. Corwin's radio drama "On a Note of Triumph,"

								       broadcast at the end of World War II, examined how the war started

								       and what lessons it carried, and contemplated what would happen

								       once it was over. The quote in question:


								     Signs and portents!

								     It was no furtive tapping on the window sill at night,

								     But clamorous pounding in the public square.


								jms speaks


								     * We're retitling "Raiding Party" (which I always figured was a

								       working title, too prosaic) to "Signs and Portents." Figured it'd

								       be nice to have one episode title per (projected) year carrying

								       the year-arc title.

								     * "Signs and Portents" is the overall title for year one; but just

								       as one may entitle a chapter in a book the same as the book

								       itself, this episode has the year-title in it (which may signify

								       that this one is, well, significant....).

								     * What did Kosh mean by "they?" And who's on the shuttle?

								       They refers to humans. There was no need to ask Sinclair, and he

								       was under orders not to. And who is on that shuttle...is an

								       excellent question.

								     * Why the same old launching scene?

								       I tend to agree re: the launching shots. There were going to be

								       some new ones for S&P, but there were SO many new shots in that

								       one that we just ran out of rendering time. There's some new ones

								       coming, though, and very dramatic looking, in "Babylon Squared"

								       and the two-parter.

								     * I agree; Ed [Wasser, who played Morden] did a great job. He was

								       perfect for that role. (He has an oddly Rod Serling-ish quality to

								       his stance, I've noticed.) And he will definitely be seen again.

								     * Ed Wasser is sort of our discovery; I pretty much wrote the part

								       of Morden with him in mind for the role. He's great in it.

								     * You noticed that too, huh? Surprised me, too. We'd cast him in the

								       part of Morden, then the first day's dailies come in, and his

								       stance, his manner, the way he looks...we all looked at the TV and

								       said, more or less at once, "Holy shit, it's Rod Serling!"

								     * Funny story. Saw Ed Wasser ("Morden") the other day, and asked him

								       if he'd had any reaction to his first appearance on the show. Just

								       one, he said. He was in a florist shop, picking out some stuff for

								       a friend who was sick. The proprieter came over, asked, "What do

								       you want?" Ed sorta mumbled about wanting some flowers. "What do

								       you want?" the owner asked again. Ed -- still not getting it --

								       said he was looking for some nice stuff for a friend who was sick.

								       "Yes, but what do you *want*?" the owner asked. At which point Ed

								       finally twigged to what was going on. He said afterward that it

								       really *is* an unnerving approach, which was kinda the point.

								       Of course, the owner then added that he thought the scene was from

								       DS9, but what the hell, it's an imperfect universe.

								     * One lovely thing about "Signs and Portents," which you picked up

								       on, is something I like to play with; implying one thing while

								       saying the opposite. Look at all the shadow's main representative,

								       Morden, does: he asks people what they want; he gets tossed out of

								       Delenn's quarters; he is pleasant in his demeanor at all times,

								       never yells, always smiles, and is courteous; he takes an action

								       which saves one of our main characters, Londo, from disgrace and

								       resignation, and helps in the process of scragging the bad guys in

								       the episode.

								       And yet everyone walks away thinking that the shadows are bad.

								       Which was of course the intent...by the way in which they did

								       "good."

								       Kosh prevents humanity from achieving immortality, scares the hell

								       out of Talia (cf. [23]"Deathwalker",) never gives anyone a

								       straight answer, doesn't seem to mind it if people fear him...and

								       we walk away with the presumption that he is good, by virtue of

								       the way in which he did things that were "bad."

								       [...] This is something I do a lot in my scripts, which I don't

								       generally see a lot of other people doing. You *really* have to

								       construct the script very carefully to pull something like this

								       off...a little game between me and the audience.

								     * Morden tried to find out what the ambassadors would like. Morden

								       arranged to rescue an important Centauri artifact. Morden helped

								       wipe out the crooks. Morden saved Londo's career, and asked for

								       nothing in return.

								       And yet we get the sense that Morden is a bad guy.

								       Kosh destroys our chance for immortality. Refuses to get involved

								       in the affairs of others. Is plainly studying us. Terrorizes one

								       of our main characters, Talia, for unknown reasons.

								       And yet we get the sense that Kosh is a good guy.

								       If anyone should ask, I really *love* writing this show....

								     * Actually, the origin of "What do you want?" comes from encounter

								       groups I've run, and from other kinds of group psychotherapy, such

								       as the original Synanon games; you ask, "Who are you?" over and

								       over, refusing to take the same answer twice, to peel away the

								       fabric of what the person is. It's a slight jump to "What do you

								       want?" (I knew that degree in Psychology would come in handy one

								       of these days.)

								     * Why Londo? Because he was the one who answered Morden's question

								       correctly. Things happen for a *reason* that is suited to who the

								       person is. G'Kar's ambitions aren't nearly big enough; Delenn

								       knows better than to get near these guys; Kosh is against them;

								       the EA are being kept at arm's length for now, the non-aligned

								       worlds aren't big enough...so here we are.

								     * There would have been more than one answer that would have

								       sufficed, but one answer was better than all the rest. Just the

								       right mix of resentment, nostalgia, ambition, frustration and a

								       sense of displaced destiny. Londo was hitting all those cylinders

								       when he answered Morden's question.

								     * "jms, what do YOU want?"

								       I'll have fries with that.

								     * The working name for the sixth race is the Shadowmen.

								     * I named them Shadows after the Jungian notion of the Shadow, which

								       is the part of the mind which is all desire, and is destructive.

								     * David: you hit it *exactly* on the head. Again, as you point out,

								       stuff here operates on a lot of different levels. I try, where I

								       can, to make a given scene do more than one thing. The hall

								       argument is a good example of this. The script stipulated a human

								       being stuck between G'Kar and Londo. Not any other race. Had to be

								       a human. Because that becomes emblematic of how we're stuck

								       between the two sides in the war, something which is *very*

								       strongly brought home in the next batch of episodes.

								       Obviously, the first most important thing in that scene is just

								       the gag, the humor. It has to work on that level, and that's how

								       it came to me first: just the gag. Then, when it came time to

								       write it, that's when I start poking at things to see if I can

								       layer on another level of meaning, and I saw a way to do a little

								       (very little) visual foreshadowing of stuff to come. Didn't matter

								       if anybody ever noticed it or not; it was never really intended to

								       be of much note, just a little item that becomes a nice bit of

								       irony later.

								     * Londo does not have the Eye. If he'd failed to turn it over, his

								       career would've been ruined; getting it back was the only thing

								       that kept him on B5.

								     * There's a reason Morden didn't go to the Earth Alliance.

								     * The raiders are gone for good, yes.

								     * _Re: Happy endings and non-happy endings_

								       As for "Signs and Portents," I don't quite know *how* to

								       characterize the ending on that one. Someone gets what they

								       wanted, but this may or may not be a good thing. I'd say basically

								       it has an ominous ending. We do try to keep it a mixed bag...one

								       person may achieve a niceness, but somebody else pays the price,

								       or gets nailed.

								     * Like Tolkien, and Jonathan Carroll, whose wonderful books start

								       out looking very nice and comfortable...and gradually take you to

								       someplace strange and dark and unique...I've tried to apply a

								       similar structure to Babylon 5. It seems to be chugging along at a

								       good clip along relatively familiar terrain. Now my job is to walk

								       up alongside the story with a crowbar and give it a good, hard

								       WHAM! to move it into a different trajectory. "Parliament" was

								       just sort of a preliminary nudge. "And the Sky Full of Stars" was

								       a good, solid WHAM! This week's episode, "Signs and Portents," is

								       another WHAM, even bigger than the one that precedes it.

								       There are two more major WHAM episodes: "Babylon Squared," dealing

								       with the fate of Babylon 4, and "Chrysalis," our season ender,

								       which is really more of an atomic bomb rather than a crowbar. So

								       roughly about one-fourth of this season's episodes are WHAM

								       episodes. That figure will increase in year two to about

								       one-third. Year three (Neilsen willing) will be half-WHAM and

								       hal-not. Year four would be three-quarters WHAM. And year five is

								       all WHAM.

								     * Let me dive in and take issue with you. The problem you seem to

								       have with the show(s) is alas a part of basic dramatic structure.

								       You have an introduction, a rising action, a climax, and then a

								       denouement. Aside from experimental theater kinds of things, that

								       is the basic underlying structure to all movies, plays and

								       television series.

								       "Twin Peaks," which you cite, really isn't a very good example

								       because, in my view, TP *never* resolved ANYthing. Thus it became

								       an exercise in viewer frustration that eventually was a major

								       reason why the show was canceled.

								       The first batch of B5 episodes tended to be a little more self

								       contained because, remember, we're trying to bring viewers in

								       here, and do so without startling or pissing them off. We get a

								       little funkier the deeper into the show we get. In some cases, as

								       with "Sky," parts of the story are resolved, parts aren't.

								       Generally, it's our feeling that if you have an open-ended B

								       story, you generally have to include an A story that has some

								       measure of closure.

								       "Signs and Portents" and "Babylon Squared" are two episodes

								       offhand that I think are emblematic of what you're asking for. The

								       A story in "Signs" is resolved...but that episode really isn't

								       *about* the A story, it's about something unusual that happens

								       with the B story that begins to set a lot of things in motion for

								       this season. And that story is ended, but not *resolved*, if you

								       get the distinction.

								     * What you address in the last bit of the music in "Signs" is what

								       I've been trying to get across. The theme music appearing there is

								       not quite what we use otherwise. I suggested to Chris that it'd be

								       cool to have the B5 theme there in *minor keys* or minor chords.

								       It's a somewhat different version, and playing a theme in minor

								       instead of major keys or chords makes it somber, sad, unsettling.

								       We've just seen B5 explode, and doing that particular riff on the

								       theme seemed to both of us a good idea. Play it again, then the

								       regular theme, and you'll see the difference.

								     * We've done a lot with themes over the season, and plan to do more,

								       developing themes for all our characters. I like interpolating

								       bits and pieces of the B5 theme into parts of the show; the

								       minor-key version at the end of "Signs" has always struck me as

								       very effective.

								     * Re: the theme music at the end of"Signs," I think it was me (but I

								       could be mistaken) who suggested to Chris, our composer, that he

								       use the theme, but in *minor chords* rather than major chords.

								       Makes it very sad, and very effective.

								     * Overall, though, I've always told Chris to push it...to go

								       absolutely as far with the music as he wants. If it goes too far,

								       we can always pull it back or duck it down a little. Basically,

								       I'm a rock-and-roll kind of guy...I like my music loud, and I like

								       a LOT of it. This show is often wall-to-wall music. Chris often

								       composes as much as 20-25 minutes of new music per episode; most

								       hour shows have maybe 13-16 minutes of music per hour episode. And

								       he is often called upon by us to do some VERY long cues. Often, TV

								       music is just there to cover a transition (10-20 seconds), or

								       establish a mood at the top or bottom of a scene, and get out (1

								       minute to 1 minute-30 seconds average). We have many, MANY cues on

								       this show that go 2, 3, even 4 minutes. I think we actually had a

								       6 minute cue at one point in one episode. Check act 3 of "Signs

								       and Portents" and see how much music we crammed into that act;

								       it's almost non-stop.

								     * _Re: The elevator scene_

								       For as long as I've been writing, I've had a very simple belief

								       that comes across with B5 as well: try to get in one really great

								       action moment,minimum one real nice character moment, one solid

								       dramatic moment...and one moment or scene that's fall-down funny.

								       I like humor. I like that characters can show another side of

								       themselves. If there is any real test of sentience, one of them

								       must surely be the possession of a sense of humor, since it

								       requires self reflection. And there is always unintentional (on

								       the part of the character, at least) humor.

								       SF-TV has generally taken itself either too seriously, with rods

								       up butts, the humor forced...or it's not taken itself seriously at

								       ALL, and gone campy. This show takes itself seriously, but not in

								       quite a way that lets it fit in either category.

								       For me, as a viewer, I enjoy the shows that are roller-coasters,

								       that take you from something very funny...and slam you headfirst

								       into a very dramatic scene. Hill Street was like that, Picket

								       Fences is like that now...why not SF? I've also found that humor

								       can help you reveal things about the characters. The Londo/G'Kar

								       scene at the elevator in "Signs and Portents," for instance. It

								       says something about both of them without coming out and *saying*

								       it.

								     * In general, you don't see a lot of light reflecting off other

								       objects when there's an explosion because in general those objects

								       aren't close enough to cause a reflection. Now, in "Signs," which

								       comes up in a couple weeks, there's explosions near a large

								       object, and there we do get some reflected light.

								     * To have a station commander *and* a rep for Earth can be

								       cumbersome in many ways, when someone has to give orders. It's

								       cleaner this way; and no different than any of the sailing vessels

								       of the 18th century and before, when each captain was viewed as,

								       and expected to perform as, the official representative of his

								       country.

								       There is, however, a second agenda at work here, which you'll find

								       out about a bit in "Raiding Party" ["Signs and Portents"].

								     * There's not a lot of CGI in either "Legacies" or "The Quality of

								       Mercy" (which will follow "Raiding Party" in the production

								       lineup), because neither story really called for it. But there's a

								       *lot* in "Raiding Party," some of it very elaborate. By way of

								       comparison, in an average B5 episode, a script from beginning to

								       end has about 60 or 70 setups (a setup is a numbered scene or

								       shot, i.e., INT. SCOCKPIT or INT. ZEN GARDEN). "Raiding Party" has

								       around 112 setups. That's more than in some movies. It's a *very*

								       busy script.

								     * Yes, we're doing virtual sets...and there's a doozy in the first

								       little bit of act one in "Signs and Portents."

								     * Yes, this is the actual text of a script. And a script contains

								       scene descriptions, dialogue, directions. (Contrary to popular

								       opinion, the actors don't just make up their lines when they hit

								       the stage, based on loose ideas by somebody.) My scripts tend to

								       be *very* detailed, with camera movement suggestions, optical

								       notes, indications of dissolves vs. cuts, on and on. A typical

								       scene might look like this:

								  EXT. BABYLON 5 - ESTABLISHING


								  A scuttleship unloads cargo from a transport parked alongside the

								  station.  PAN ACROSS with the scuttleship, tracking with it until

								  it passes into the docking bay, then DOWN TO the observation dome

								  window, where we can just see into


								  INT. OBSERVATION DOME


								  where Lieutenant-Commander IVANOVA stands at the console, cup in

								  hand, staring bleakly out into the starscape as SINCLAIR comes up

								  alongside.


								                     IVANOVA

								          I hate mornings...I've always had a

								          hard time getting up when it's dark

								          outside.


								                     SINCLAIR

								          We're in space.  It's always dark

								          outside.


								                     IVANOVA

								                (forlornly)

								          I know...I know....

								   (That, by the way, is a slight re-do of an actual shot from "Raiding

								       Party.")

								       A script page, single-spaced, works out to about the same wordage

								       as a double-spaced prose fiction page, about 225-250 words per.

								     * _Why was the ship in Lady Ladira's name instead of Lord Kiro's?_

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

								       in her name.

								     * I think that the Eye was returned the next day, so there was a

								       goodly span between Ladira's vision, and the scene in Londo's

								       quarters.

								     * _What became of the Eye?_

								       The eye is now safely back home and on display.

								     * I hate to burst your bubble, but the Raider ship *was* rotating.

								       Look at it again. It's most visible when the ship is being

								       photographed from behind with B5 in the background. You can see

								       the round part of the ship rotating (with the docking bay at

								       center).


								   [29][Next]


								      [30]Last update: January 27, 1998


								References


								   1. file://localhost/cgi-bin/imagemap/titlebar

								   2. LYNXIMGMAP:file://localhost/lurk/maps/maps.html#titlebar

								   3. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/background/013.shtml

								   4. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/synops/013.html

								   5. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/credits/013.html

								   6. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/episodes.php

								   7. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/012.html

								   8. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/014.html

								   9. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#OV

								  10. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#BP

								  11. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#UQ

								  12. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#AN

								  13. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#NO

								  14. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#JS

								  15. http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?+Graham,+Gerrit

								  16. http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?+Wasser,+Ed

								  17. file://localhost/lurk/p5/intro.html

								  18. file://localhost/lurk/p5/013

								  19. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/008.html

								  20. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#JS:1

								  21. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/020.html

								  22. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/000.html

								  23. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/009.html

								  24. file://localhost/lurk/lurker.html

								  25. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/013.html#TOP

								  26. file://localhost/cgi-bin/uncgi/lgmail

								  27. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/episodes.php

								  28. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/012.html

								  29. file://localhost/home/woodstock/hyperion/docs/lurk/guide/014.html

								  30. file://localhost/lurk/lastmod.html