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/Usenet/jms97-10-usenet

1730 lines
53 KiB
Raw Permalink Blame History

JMS (and coproducer George Johnsen) Usenet messages for October 1997.
Date: 2 Oct 1997 06:22:02 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Don't hate us spoiler junkies!
I understand what you're saying on one level...but you have to understand that
for every person who reads the spoilers just to savor what's coming, I get 1-2
who use it to jump funky on me and complain about what's coming before seeing
it.
So you might understand why I get a bit cranky about this issue.
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 06:23:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Sleeping in Light ( *Spoilers* )
The other thing in all this to remember is that once I learned the source of
material for the spoilers' page (the synopses that WB is required to provide
to TV stations), I made it a point ot have WB route the synopses to me for
editing. While I can't force too much stuff out of them or they become
useless to the purpose mandated by the FCC...stations have to be responsible
for, and informed about, what they broadcast...I *can* and do omit certain
little details whenever I can.
Why?
Because the spoilers page pisses me off...because no matter what's in them, I
get grief over them...and anybody who reads these things (altered or
otherwise) and assumes they know the full story and goes off because of it
deserves whatever they get.
The synopses are not for general distribution outside the TV stations; if other
people are getting them, they're breaking the rules and ruining the dramatic
impact of episodes by letting the shape of the episodes get out before
broadcsat, and as far as I'm concerned, that entitles me to fuck with them.
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 06:23:44 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS:"Saint Leibowitz and the Wild Horse Woman"
>What are your thoughts regarding this book?
I don't know enough about it to form an intelligent opinion, so all I can do is
buy it when it comes out and see if it's any good or not.
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 06:59:36 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS - A few good words
Thanks...I do get short sometimes (especially under the current conditions of
the back annoyance, the carpal tunnel, and the pain killers)...but overall it
work out.
>P.S. Thanks for giving me a reason to get a DDS dish;-]
An interesting idea occurs to me, btw, now that you've mentioned this. TNT has
wondered aloud how many people are going to sign up for cable or dishes
primarily for B5. If you (reading this) have done so, you may want to let
them know over at http://www.tnt.turner.com
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 20:58:06 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS you insidious bastard!!!!!!(just kidding)
That's good to know.
It's worth noting that I know a number of writers who have been, and in some
cases are, associated with ST in one incarnation or another (and some of the
cast), and they have been more than content to have us letting people know
that the problem is the studio's limitations, not the potential writing, that
has been the problem...so I'm glad that the studio may be loosening the reins
a little, possibly due to fan pressure, to let the writers do what they want.
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 21:03:39 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Title for Season 5? *Possible Spoiler*
I had to give the S5 title to TNT today so they can begin promoting it, but
would rather they brought it out at this point.
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 21:05:29 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Don't hate us spoiler junkies!
>You're implying at least 50/50 ratio of reasonable people like Alison to the
> jerks who jump ugly on you.
Okay, okay...math not Zathras strength....
jms
Date: 2 Oct 1997 21:07:35 -0400
Subject: Re: "endgame" (*spoiler*)
You're right in terms of what Garibaldi did and didn't do, and we've avoided
the ultimate repercussions in other places for other things (he said vaguely,
not wanting to post spoilers)...but you can only do that so far, and if you go
further you start cheating. You also remove the dramatic impact of the
actions of your characters if they do not have consequences. In this case, it
ties very much into this character's background...and would, in another
universe in which CC decided to stay, have spun out into some rather
interesting developments.
jms
Date: 3 Oct 1997 05:22:57 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: Smokers?
You will eventually see one person smoking on B5, at the performer's
request...but other than that, I think it's not something I want to encourage.
jms
Date: 3 Oct 1997 15:23:55 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Stations are dropping B5 left and right!
> Is it at all conceivable that a certain B5-friendly
>cable network could help us out here?
We're talking to them about some long-term solutions, but to the immediate
problem...no, there's nothing that TNT can do.
What you're seeing is the reason we couldn't do B5 in regular
syndication...commitments were made to WBN, to UPN and Fox and other weblets
that are chewing up ALL the available slots on syndicated stations...there's
no room at the inn. Also, we're now a lame duck show for the stations, some
of which are kind of annoyed that we're now going to cable (their direct
competition), and don't want to back-handedly promote somthing that's going to
their competitor. (I think some of them would have preferred we go quietly
into that good night than become a competition.)
jms
Date: 3 Oct 1997 17:53:08 -0400
Subject: Re: Endgame ( *Spoilers* )
I can suggest for now that you hold off these questions until after the episode
airs, so I can discuss them more openly.
jms
Date: 3 Oct 1997 20:20:19 -0400
Subject: Re: thestation.com down again?
Dunno...it works fine when I log on.
jms
Date: 5 Oct 1997 04:36:23 -0400
Subject: from jms: cool merchandise
I'm putting this in a few different places, so forgive any redundency....
We're starting to pull together the licensed B5 merchandise being put out by
the fan club, and I'm very pleased by it...especially the pins, as noted
below. For a long time now, pirate dealers have been putting out fake B5
Earth Alliance pins, and they've been crummily made, either flimsy or
breakable or thick and clumsy, and charging fair-sized bucks for rotten,
inferior products. No more. Now you can get the real things, identical to
the acual props in every single respect, and overseen directly by Babylonian
Productions to ensure that they're accurate. (Along with everything else
here.) But that's been a real sore point for me for a long time, and I'm glad
to have it taken care of once and for all.
The following products are now available via the Fan Club website, located at
http://www.thestation.com
1) product # FCM - Fan Club Membership
This gets you the quarterly Universe Today, access to the Gold Channel personal
logs on thestation.com, and discounts on all FC products.
2) product # FCTC-01 - Fleer/Skybox Special Edition box with JMS autograph
3) product # FCTC-02 - Fleer/Skybox Special Edition box with Bruce Boxleitner
autograph.
4) product # FCJ-01 - Earth Alliance Pin
Baked Enamel blue and gold-tone pin, just like the real ones. Pricing: member
$12, non $14
5) product # FCS-04 - "The Great Maker" T-shirt
When I directed "Sleeping in Light" (422), during lunch a substantial number of
cast and crew disappeared from the set, and returned wearing these shirts as a
surprise. A lot of people asked for these to be made available, and now they
are. Front reads, "Shh...The Great Maker is Directing". The back reads, "And
on the seventh day we wrapped". Pricing: member $14.95 L & XL $16.95 for XXL,
non $16.95 L & XL $18.95 for XXL.
6) product # FCP-02 - Recognition Chart Poster
This one I like a lot because it's just stinking cool...it's a perfect replica
of the recognition poster seen in pilot ready room on B5, struck from the same
master. It has Minbari, Shadow, and Earth ship silhouettes, as you'd see on a
WWII battleship. 32"x24" Pricing: member $8, non $10.
7) product # FCH-01 - Aggie Hat
The product number may be revised. This is the crew cap for The Agamemnon,
Sheridan's ship prior to being assigned to B5, seen in "Knives" and which will
be seen in the fifth season as well. (And those who see the final 4 will see
that the Aggy has a lot more to do with the story.) Pricing is, I believe,
the same as the next item:
8) product # FCH-02 - Psi Corps Hat
This is another one we've been asked to produce by fans. The cap is black with
the Psi Corps logo on front. "The Psi Corps is your friend" is embroidered on
the back. Pricing: members $16, non $18
9) product # FCBK - Antioch Babylon 5 Calendar 1998
This is possibly the best graphic product associated with B5 publishing to
date. It's just gorgeous, with montage prints, quotes from the series, photos
galore, and many of the major events in the B5 storyline noted by date. This
is a limited edition with serialized numbers. We have the lowest numbers
available on the market. Pricing: members $11.95, non $14.95
And there are the CD's available from us, done by Christopher Franke:
product # FCCD-01 - Original Soundtrack
product # FCCD-02 - Messages From Earth
product # FCCD-03 - Avalon
product # FCCD-04 - Z'Ha'Dum
product # FCCD-05 - Shadow Dancing
product # FCCD-06 - Severed Dreams
product # FCCD-07 - Walkabout
Again, all this can be obtained via the Fan Club site, which has an order form.
Some of this has yet to be added to the form, so in the case of short or
limited orders, this will let you get a jump on things before they're sold
out.
What we're doing here is what I think should be done with this stuff: you make
what you personally would want just because you think it's just cool....
jms
jms
Date: 5 Oct 1997 21:42:23 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: (Spoilers) 419 Question
Yes, there was a small scene that got cut for time.
Good catch.
jms
Date: 6 Oct 1997 02:38:54 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: copyright issue
>I've put together a couple of B5 logo sets and was wondering if I
>would be violating the copyright if I offered them free on my website.
>all the pictures I used were taken from the newsgroups or free sites
>on the web.
I don't actually know the answer to this...my guess is that somewhere in the
files they would have to have the WB (c) notice, otherwise you run the risk of
turning them in to public domain stuff, which makes WB very cranky.
jms
Date: 6 Oct 1997 02:39:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Between the darkness and the light
>I was wondering if any of the execs at
>paramount have looked at Babylon 5 and
>what it has become and thought something
>like, "Boy I messed up when I didn't
>grab that show when it was offered to
>me."
No, I doubt it...the only thing that has ever reached us was the frequent
lament at the top that we're "messing up the franchise that it took (them) us
25 years to build."
jms
Date: 6 Oct 1997 11:02:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Between the Darkness and the Light ( *Spoilers* )
>Was Between the Darkness and the Light shot after it was known Claudia
>Christian was leaving the show?
Negative. We'd finished all S4 shooting at the time this occured.
Unless something miraculous happens in the
>next show.... Were new scenes shot and edited in to the ending?
Negative.
jms
Date: 6 Oct 1997 21:00:17 -0400
Subject: Re: City of Sorrows - Great Job Kathryn!!!!!
>Sinclair is stated
>as missing for 48 hours rather than 24, but otherwise it's perfectly
>correct).
That was a typo we *both* missed...
> I don't know if you've noticed this, but if one takes the Arisia 3
>"twice the size" of Earth statistic as meaning twice the volume, it works
>out to a little over 2-G.
Yeah, she transposed the mass figures when she was putting it all down, and
hopes to correct this and the above in the next printing.
jms
Date: 10 Oct 1997 05:44:19 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: T-shirt quality
Which shirts are you referring to? If they're the Creation shirts, they've
been up and down in quality, but they've started working harder. The All-U
shirts tend ot be extremely good.
If they're pirated shirts, there's nothing I can do to help you.
jms
Date: 10 Oct 1997 05:54:44 -0400
Subject: Re: Between the Darkness and the Light ( *Spoilers* )
>In the show In Between Darkness and the Light the woman in the
>interrogation room said "put a BULLET in his head" but, they do not
>use guns any more??? Was this a mistake???
Nope. We've established (in Grey 17 is Missing, for instance) that guns are
still used on Earth and elsewhere; but in a space station, you don't want a
slug-thrower because it tends to a) ricochet a lot off metal walls, or b) cut
through something vital that would breach the hull potentially.
jms
Date: 11 Oct 1997 19:09:14 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: Time constraints and video
>There are ways of looking at this issue--1) this is a chance to restore
>the original intention and 2) the forced changes really don't matter
>much in the grand scheme of things. Which side of this issue do you
>come down on? (As far as I can tell, the only episode you've really
>wanted to get your hands back on is "The Gathering")
Unfortunately, it would require doing a re-edit on the episodes, plus
re-scoring, and re-mixing, and that takes a fair amount of money, so it's not
something we can do.
jms
Date: 11 Oct 1997 19:10:29 -0400
Subject: Re: I want B5 models dammit!!!!!
They'll be out from Revell this Christmas.
jms
Date: 12 Oct 1997 20:17:41 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Cover of _Locus_
>Just how tall *are* you, O Great Maker?
>
>
Right around 6'3"-6'4" depending on whether or not I slouch.
jms
Date: 12 Oct 1997 20:19:33 -0400
Subject: Between the Darkness and the Light ( *Spoilers* )
Spoilers for Between the Darkness and the Light
The Advanced destroyer group was still somewhat in the works when they hauled
it out to go after the fleet. They'd been expecting mainly to go after other
Earth ships (as was noted in the episode), and didn't count on exclusively
being confronted by Whitestars. Still, there were a lot of them here, and
they did a lot of damage by sheer force of numbers.
Corwin would be running the station in everyone's absence.
jms
Date: 12 Oct 1997 20:22:23 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: Shorter filming time?
>I heard that Mira Furlan has been commenting about the shorter filming time
>of
>season 5 (6 days instead of 7 days per episode) and that she feels she does
>not
>have time to properly rehearse.
I find that an odd statement, since the time to rehearse is still the same. I
directed "Sleeping in Light" in 6 days, and we never had a problem with
rehearsal time. Besides, most actors rehearse while other scenes are
shooting, running their lines. So again, I don't know what she's referring to
here.
Re: shooting time...yes, we went from 7 days to 6 days, which is an increase of
only about 1 page per day. (Our shooting scripts are only about 42 pages, so
you're going from about 6 pages per day to 7 pages.) There were several
reasons for this, one financial, but more important, TNT wants to run all the
S5 episodes STRAIGHT THROUGH WITHOUT BREAKS. 22 episodes in 22 weeks.
Now, the first few aren't a problem, because you're looking at January and we
started filming in August. Six months. And it takes 52-65 days for
post-production work for each episode. (Note: I'm not including 501, which we
had to rush through to air in 422's place.) But there's a heck of a lot LESS
time between when we finish 522, and when we air it. So we have to make sure
we can get all the episodes done in time.
Frankly, I don't see that it's made that much difference. If I could direct in
6 days, anybody can. And the prep time for the director is the same, so that
hasn't changed at all.
jms
Date: 12 Oct 1997 20:25:15 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: 8 minutes? IIRT & BTD&TL spoilers)
>At Defcon 4 in Tulsa, you mentioned that you had included eight minutes in
>Intersections in Real Time which you pulled and added to Between the Darkness
>and the Light. Now that both episodes have aired, I hoped you might indulge
>my curiosity by telling me which eight minutes.
The Garibaldi material through the map sequence with Number One was originally
in "Intersections." It got shunted over to 419 when 418 ran 7-8 minutes long,
and 419 ran 8 minutes short.
jms
Date: 12 Oct 1997 12:44:36 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS - Do you approved of this (FWD:### BABYLON 5 Card Game
While the product is sanctioned, the email is apparently not coming from them,
but from a store that is *selling* the stuff. That is not under my control,
unfortunately.
Frankly, I object to this, and have sent email saying so.
jms
Date: 13 Oct 1997 14:06:24 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: "The Gathering" re-edit a no-go?
No, the funding was approved, and we're working on it now.
jms
Date: 14 Oct 1997 04:04:23 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Am I crazy?
>I just think it would be great to watch the entire series
>without knowing what will happen next. I envy the future viewers of the show
on TNT.
I sometimes think about this myself. I'd love to be able to see the show the
way viewers do...without knowing what didn't go right, what got trimmed, what
line wasn't quite properly delivered...I'd love to be able to sit home and see
this unfold.
> And so. Do you think I'm crazy?
Just back away from the keyboard and keep your hands where we can see them.
jms
Date: 14 Oct 1997 04:04:46 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: Expense of title sequences?
>Some rumours have been going around the net that title sequences are very
>expensive to make and that's why they aren't updated very often... except of
>course on Babylon 5. So, what's the truth? Is a title sequence expensive or
>is
>this just another rumour/lie that has grown a life of its own on the net?
(shrugs)
I dunno...I guess there's some money involved, but not with B5.
See, most shows hire somebody, a company, to design their title sequence. That
costs about $20-30,000. A fair chunk of change for some shows. Also, they
like the same title each season to give that comfortable continuity networks
need.
We don't have that kind of money to toss around on a title design, so each
season I design the titles. I write the narration, and work with the editors
(sometimes with John Copeland) to choose the images, and then I work with
Chris to tell him what kind of music I want to go with the titles. So our
cost is just the editing time, and the new composition...maybe a couple grand,
tops.
jms
Date: 14 Oct 1997 04:06:14 -0400
Subject: Re: attn: JMS - Earth, Final Conflict
Haven't seen the show yet...and the back is better.
jms
Date: 14 Oct 1997 04:12:31 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: Showing all Sides
>JMS, you've always tried to show every point of view and what motivates your
>characters. Why have you not shown Clark's point of view?
I tried to do it through his lieutenants and plenepotentiaries (hope I spelled
that right, I'm too tired to get the dictionary down). ISN gives you his
point of view, ditto for Nightwatch, MiniPax, others. I think if I had him
just saying it out loud, it would diminish him much the way that repeated
exposure to the shadow vessels gradually removed their mystery and menace.
Less is more.
jms
Date: 14 Oct 1997 04:17:52 -0400
Subject: Re: ATT JMS: Updates on your "home town"?
>A few times you've mentioned you dream lucidly, and that most (all?) of
>your dreams take place in a town that only exists in your head.
>
>Anything going on there recently? or is it all crowded out by the 2260's?
>
>
I don't know...lately, I've been falling asleep so exhausted that I don't
remember my dreams...I close my eyes, it gets black, and then it gets morning.
We're in the final stages of finishing off the prequel, and between that and
everything else, I got a grand total of 90 minutes sleep yesterday through
today.
jms
Date: 15 Oct 1997 00:53:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Susan's Speech, "Darkness and Light" (Spoilers?)
Yeah, it was a bit over the top, deliberately so.
I put it in the category of a boxer who's going up against an opponent who may
be well matched...and wants to psych the other person out.
If you look at "Give me liberty or give me death!" or similar statements, made
to rally support or make a point, they're generally bigger than life, a bit
over the top. That's so we can know where the top is so we can climb up there
ourselves.
jms
Date: 15 Oct 1997 01:43:22 -0400
Subject: Re: Endgame Problems (Spoilers)
Okay, one general response here...people are seeing rush where in many cases
there is NOT a rush. Look, pay attention here: WE'RE IN THE FOURTH ACT OF THE
EARTH CYCLE. Like the fourth act of an episode, you have to really start
cranking. You want it to be at white-heat once you hit the ground.
What's in Endgame, and most of Between... was always going to be there, with or
without a 5th season. I made my trims in the period PRIOR TO these episodes,
for the most part.
This is the culmination of something we've been building now for three years,
and I'm going to make it as damned fast-paced as I can.
So don't go into this assuming it was rushed...it's *fast*, and that's the
difference here.
People complain when we do character stories that the arc isn't moving fast
enough...people complain that it's moving too fast when the arc is in full
gear...sombody get a concensus going here, okay?
Now, to the other points, described as "flaws":
>The absolute worst was the business of smuggling the telepaths aboard
>the EA destroyers. You would have me believe that on 30 seperate ships,
>not one cargo handler or quartermaster would happen to notice the giant
>freezer cases with frozen bodies clearly visible through the glass?
In something like this, you don't move unless you have the main quartermaster
at the Mars base ON YOUR SIDE. You stuff it all into cargo loaders and
crates, and ship it up. Have you ever seen military shipments? I looked into
this, and security for big crates like this is done *at the point of
shipping*. So that one's down.
>1) Marcus deserts to return to B5 to save Ivanova. Sheridan feels there
>is nothing that can be done because radio contact is not possible due to
>EA jamming. Why not detach a single Star Fury to get beyond jammer range
>and warn B5 via radio? Or send it dashing back to B5 to warn the staff
>in person?
>Mega screw up. It just doesn't work. Sheridan would have immedietly
>authorized dispatch of a courier. Jammers are old technology and
>doctrine would dictate the use of couriers as a regular fallback.
Okay, here's where YOU'RE wrong. (If you can sit there and say that things are
"mega-screwups" and say I "bit the big one" in places, you don't mind--can't
mind--if I take same tone, do you?
You don't send a ship away to chase one person when you're going into a battle.
You don't KNOW what ships you are and aren't going to need. In theory you
took everything you had because you thought you needed it. Yeah, Marcus was a
friend, but a lot of friends would die this day. You think he would put
Marcus's situation ahead of the fleet? Isolate one ship and risk it to go
after him? Ever been in the military? You talk about it, but what you
propose doesn't make sense. Would Patton have sent back a tank because
somebody fell behind? No.
The other point comes where you clearly misunderstood what was being
said...massively misunderstood...bit the big one, one might say. To
elaborate, since this touches a point above:
>2) The Agememnon is about to ram the defense grid satellite, conveying
>Sheridan and crew to certain doom. At the last moment, the Apollo saves
>the day. The General says "We were monitoring the situation" or words to
>that effect.
>HOW??? No communication is possible through hyper space due to earth
>jamming. The Apollo is in Mars orbit,
No, that's NOT what was said. The jammers are set up to cut off communication
OUTSIDE MARS ORBIT. That's what was said, that the jammers cut in once they
were past Mars (for security purposes). The same thing was said in Lines
Of..., where Franklin was having a hard time getting word to B5 *past the Mars
jammers*. Further, if all communications were cut off in Hyperspace, inside
Mars orbit, then you couldn't have had ship-to-ship communications to tell
Sheridan ABOUT Marcus, could you? No, you couldn't.
Do you know why you're seeing flaws that don't exist? Because you think it's
rushed, so you're LOOKING for things, and actually misinterpreting things
because of it.
> The effects of
>season compression are painfully evident
No, what's evident...is that you're not paying attention.
And in future, you may want to phrsae things as questions, until you're
absolutely sure what's opinion and what's fact, and be as polite in your
comments as you would like me to be in my reply. Okay?
jms
Date: 15 Oct 1997 16:41:54 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS : Integrity of UK B5 Magazine
Yes, every argument has two sides. But not all sides are equally valid or
truthful. If they were, then you could never decide between A and B. If I
say that the Germans won WW2, and you say they lost WW2, they are different
points of view...but one is slightly more valid than the other.
What is stated in the magazine is what happened. There are no subjective
characterizations here, those are the specific events which have been
corroborated now by a number of people. Should the B5 magazine put in things
that we know to be utterly and totally false? For instance:
>For example, a key element in Claudia's contract "dispute" (for lack
>of a better word) was that because the show was not being renewed par
>se and was in fact being transferred to TNT, she was asked to give up
>residuals for those shows - a "pay cut" to use her words.
> I expect
>such a critical detail to be mentioned when presenting an unbiased
>article on just why she did not renew her contract. Instead, the
>article completely failed to mention it, choosing instead to mention
>that she passed on renewal of her contract without giving any reason
>why.
Let me put this to you in the most straightforward way I can: this is an
absolute and total fabrication, and has been from day one. No actors have
been asked to give away their residuals, and no actor was asked to take a pay
cut. It never, ever, ever happened.
What did happen was this: there are different formulas for residuals in
network, syndication, and cable TV. The network formula is the largest fee
per rerun, followed by syndication and then cable. In cable, AS PER THE
SCREEN ACTORS GUILD rules, the amount an actor is paid over double-scale is
credited against the domestic residuals (also not foreign residuals) in much
the way an advance is paid against a book. When that amount is earned out,
the residuals begin again. This is standard cable residuals. So a) nobody
was giving away residuals, and b) all of the actors received their pay
increases this season as per their contracts. Every one of them.
So you ask me why that wasn't mentioned. Because it is simply, flatly, and
categorically and PROVABLY untrue. It's not a matter of presenting another
opinion. It's not true. Period. Never happened.
As for not explaining why she chose not to re-up for S5, that would have
required subjective implication, and she never TOLD us. She simply allowed
the offer from WB to lapse, let the contract expire, so we had no tie on
her..and she left.
Yes, she asked for fewer episodes, but to be paid for all of them, and that was
expressed to me prior to her passing on the offer. But nobody ever said,
"Okay, you didn't give us X, so we're passing." They just let it pass without
comment. TO THIS DAY they have not communicated to us their specific
reasoning. Should the magazine speculate on what's going on inside the heads
of other people?
>It also failed to mention Claudia's offer to work 18 of the 22
>scheduled episodes
She didn't offer that. She offered to work in 18 but get paid for 22, which
constitutes a pay raise, which violates our contracts with all the other
actors. Again, why should we put something in that is not true?
>and the fact that she had been dissatisfied with
>her role, feeling it had afforded her little opportunity to develop.
Again, she never said that to us, or said it to the magazine.
>t is also on record that Claudia
>said she was never given the option of working and being paid for 18
>episodes, an option she said she would have been satisfied with.
Where is that on record? It was certainly never expressed to us during all of
this when it was going on. And she has never said, in the post you mention,
that she would do 18 episodes for only 18 episodes pay. Check the original
post. It's not there.
You say that her POV was not represented. Ours was not represented on her
websites (any of them). I imagine therefore that you have sent email to those
sites, and to Claudia, protesting that as well.
There's a kind of mentality that says that you can't make any kind of choice
between two arguments, that all sides are equally valid. But that's not true.
Some statesments are more valid than others IF they can be proven. Every
single statement we have made has been proven, and verified by cast members,
and even those at the Blackpool convention who were there as fans. There is
not one shred of evidence to back up the statements that pay cuts were asked
for, or residuals were given away, both of which would violate SAG rules and
are simply untrue.
If something is a fabrication, should it be printed "as-is?" Or do you post
rebuttals to it within the same article, and get into a brawl in the magazine?
Or do you simply state the absolute bare facts, without characterization, and
let what's *provable* stand on its own?
That latter approach was the only way to go.
jms
Date: 15 Oct 1997 20:46:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Endgame ( *Spoilers* )
>Trav1701 (trav1701@aol.com) wrote:
>: In article <tHlQ00O5IMlW091yn@teleport.com>, larryc@teleport.com (Larry
>: Caldwell) writes:
>: >Yup. Gotta be the dumbest line ever voiced on B5. I guess Sheridan's
>: >lasers musta run out of bullets, so there's nothing for it but to stoke
>: >the boilers and send her to the bottom. Ew, ik, retch, gag.
As long as I'm being cranky (it's 4:30 a.m. and I'm entitled)...I see you based
this reaction off the teaser.
Y'know, you might actually want to see the episode, and put this in context,
before calling it "the dumbest line ever voiced in B5" and making fun of
"running out of bullets."
Spoiler info....
THEY KICKED THE SHIT OUT OF THE SHIP AND BLASTED IT WITH MISSILES AND THE ONLY
THING HOLDING IT TOGETHER WAS BALING WIRE AND SPIT.
Now...next time...maybe you'll wait and actually *see* the thing before you
judge something?
Or am I expecting too much?
Y'know...Morgan and Wong from X-Files used to be on the nets a lot, and they
got out because they were driven to despair by the casual, callous cruelties
of people who judge harshly and without any kind of information...Mira was on
for a while, and isn't on anymore, because she says people are just casually
cruel, they bitch about things that aren't even true half the time.
I know a lot of others, actors and producers, who just don't want to put up
with this crap.
Some days, I don't blame them. Some days, I think I'd like to join them.
jms
Date: 15 Oct 1997 21:01:39 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Effects in "Endgame" *POSSIBLE SPOILERS*
>However, one thing I noticed is that the surface "shots" of Mars done by
>your special effects people were beautiful. Much, much, much better
>than any other Mars shot you have done.
Thanks...actually, most of the prior mars shots were done by an outside
contractor, who's been doing such shots for the history of the show. NDEI's
boys wanted a chance to do them, and did so.
>And, I am including the great
>integration of moving figures on the graphics and the nice shots of the
>shuttles leaving.
Yeah, they're not bad...we still need to improve a bit on the movements, and
the camera still moves a bit too fast, which gives it that computer-y
feel...but overall, not bad.
>One thing though...how long did it take too render the Mars exterior
>shots used throughout "Endgame"?
>
Quite a lot, I understand.
jms
Date: 16 Oct 1997 14:15:11 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS - 4th and 5th season UK video tapes
>However, since WB has dropped
>the series, will they nonetheless continue to release the UK videos
>for the 4th season?
No, WB hasn't dropped the series; it's just airing in the US on TNT, that
doesn't affect international distribution or video sales. It'll be the same
as always.
jms
Date: 16 Oct 1997 14:14:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Babylon 5 a failure?
Y'know, people who throw ST at us and say that B5 is a failure forget that the
first ST only went 3 seasons, and was considered a total and complete failure
by the television industry for years.
jms
Date: 16 Oct 1997 14:15:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Endgame ( *Spoilers* )
>Same with "ramming speed". There simply isn't one speed that's better
>for ramming than other speeds.
>But just asking for "ramming speed" is Just Plain Silly.
>It can be retconned, it can be foregiven, but it's Just Plain Silly.
(he taps his foot as yet another expert lurches into the field)
You are in a space ship, in a vacuum, heading toward target X. You understand
that it takes time to transfer energy and movement toward another plane, so
you go at X-speed toward that object if you want the option of applying
thrusters and angling away from the object before you slam into it.
If, on the other hand, you *want* to hit the object, and you have no interest
in holding back your thrusters to allow you to diverge from the target in the
amount of space remaining between you and it, you proceed at Y speed, with
your thrusters putting out their maximum amount of fuel.
Y = ramming speed.
jms
Date: 16 Oct 1997 14:17:16 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: The Rescue (BtDatL spoilers)
(* Spoilers for Darkness and Light *)
>Or would the rescue have proceeded much as we saw?
>
Yes, it would have.
Some have complained about the rescue, arguing that they wanted to see a big
battle. (To which answer #1 is wait 7 days.) They wanted to see the fleet
smack Mars and free him in a big battle.
Well, if you do that, you can kiss goodbye any chance of the fleet then doing
what it's SUPPOSED to be doing, which is the ligberation of Earth. While
they're tied up and planetbound (on one side) at Mars, Earth swoops in and
knocks them out. Y ou also lose any possible aspect of surprise.
It *had* to be done quickly, through the back door, rather than the fleet that
some might have been expecting, so it'd look like a Resistance job, not a
Fleet job.
jms
Date: 16 Oct 1997 14:18:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Between the Darkness and the Light ( *Spoilers* )
>Here it is,
>near the end of season 4 and you introduce a new important talent,
>Ivanova's eidetic memory. I'm not saying it's out of character for her
>or that it contradicts anything in the past. My point is that with all
>that came before and your exposure on the web you must have planned this
>well in advance>so as not to open yourself up to "why didn't she
>remember ...?" questions. In a novel, if you or an editor finds a
>contradiction with what came before, it can be changed.
(also taps foot...)
She's a latent telepath. About a P1. As has been established on the show in
the past. That gives her a slight edge in many areas.
Also, an eidetic memory does not equal facility with language. I have a
somewhat eidetic memory. I can usually remember visuals and things said to me
with extreme clarity. (Unless I'm in convention mode at the time, at which
point all bets are off.) But I have a real problem with learning languages,
which involves not just memorization, but *translation,* which is a skill, a
knack that some others have and some don't. (Spanish rolled off me, but for
some reason I have a knack for German, though my vocabulary's gone all to
hell.)
jms
Date: 17 Oct 1997 18:58:37 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS : Integrity of UK B5 Magazine
>Joe can you confirm whether or not it is a copy of the WB press
>release. If so, I think I just proved my point.
>
No, it's not.
Look...the article posts items that have not been contradicted by Claudia. The
basic series of facts as presented are, as far as I know, unchallenged.
It says that "opinions differ" on the background of the situation. No, it
doesn't give her story on the background, but it ALSO DOESN'T GIVE MINE.
Nowhere in there is there any background from this side of the desk. If one
side were presented in detail, that's one thing...but NEITHER background was
quoted in this, only the specific facts of what happened: that she didn't give
the extension (she admits this), that the deadline passed and the offer was
withdrawn (ditto).
Other folks want to fight over the why, fine...the article only had the
obligation to go into *what* happened, not get into the fannish fight over the
whys and wherefores...which, frankly, if I'm to be honest, are really none of
anybody's business...and would never have been had Claudia not started this at
conventions.
jms
Date: 17 Oct 1997 20:35:45 -0400
Subject: Re: Attn. JMS: Should you take a vacation from the net?
>Besides, you've mentioned before that you've been on the net for years;
>I'd think you'd have learned how to shrug this sort of thing off by now.
>If you can't stand the heat, get outta the kitchen.
It's not the heat, it's the stupidity....
jms
Date: 19 Oct 1997 10:20:04 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN:JMS Question on the budget
Specific dollar amounts are secondary to one basic truth: the studios aren't in
the charity business. If a show makes money, if it is a *success*, they keep
it on the air. If it ain't, the show is history, it's that simple. If B5
were a "failure" it sure as hell wouldn't be on for a fifth year, and we
wouldn't be in serious, last-stage negotations with WB for a *sequel series*.
You don't try and sell a sequel for something that didn't work.
WB has made hideous amounts of money on this show. From their point of view,
it's a massive success. There's simply no other reason they would keep the
show on the air. Period.
jms
Date: 19 Oct 1997 10:20:25 -0400
Subject: Re: why bother?
>If you are sick of people asking you questions or bothering you about
>the whole CC thing, and/or picking at the plot, why do you answer them
>anymore ?
It's just hard, that's all...I have this belief that refuses to go away that if
you explain something in a reasonable way, with all the facts at your
disposal, people will, in the final analysis, generally be reasonable.
I got on here in large measure because I wanted people to *understand* this
business, and I guess I keep trying to get them to really understand this one.
jms
Date: 19 Oct 1997 10:21:04 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: _3_ projects this summer?
I think your friend is confused....
He may also have been thinking of Hypernauts, which was done by Doug in
coordination with Thornton and Optic Nerve.
jms
Date: 19 Oct 1997 10:21:24 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: DO YOU *UNDERSTAND* Vorlons?
I could give you an answer, but it would take a million years to parse it, so
best to leave it be, I suppose....
jms
Date: 20 Oct 1997 00:23:17 -0400
Subject: Re: Attn: JMS; Episode time shorter?
>We've noticed that the episode time has been cut back from the usual 44:00
>even
> to ~ 41:45. What's the story? Is it just our local affiliate or is this
> universal? It doesn't seem like we're missing anything, other than obvious
> edits to fit that have already been discussed here. What's the story?
The time hasn't been cut back, unless your local station is cutting out stuff,
but the time you give second there is correct. The only change is that we got
*back* 30 seconds to put into the show after last season, when they dropped
the Kung Fu promos.
jms
Date: 20 Oct 1997 06:20:10 -0400
Subject: Re: JMS: TNT/PTEN/WB/etc
In Which our Correspondent Swallows His Fists....
>Given the fact that TNT is putting much more into supporting and
>promoting the show for the final season, do you regret that this kind of
>support has not been there for the previous four seasons? I know that
>you have had minimal trouble with WB creatively, but they really didn't
>*support* the show as well as they could have.
>Do you think that the hands-off approach made the show better by making
>you work harder?
This is about as much a deal with the devil as I can imagine.
But on the whole, without getting into specifics...the truth is that this show
is going to be around for 20, 30, maybe even 50 years, if I did it right. 30
years from now, it won't make any difference if we got good PR or we didn't,
if we were well received when we first went on or not...the story is the
story, and I was allowed, most remarkably, to tell it my way, with virtually
no creative interference, and that will be noted in years to come, not the
rest.
I'd take that deal again in a hot second.
jms
Date: 20 Oct 1997 19:52:46 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Endgame & Titles Question
>Second, and unrelated, a question occurred to me this weekend. Will
>"Sleeping in Light" have its own unique opening title sequence and/or
>theme music?
SiL won't air until next year...but yeah, we've done some stuff to the credits.
BTW, saw the first pass today on the S5 title sequence, based on my outline to
the editors...looks pretty spiffy, and a big difference from what we've done
before, stylistically.
jms
Date: 21 Oct 1997 10:20:39 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Choosing what to show (SPOILERS for 421)
>One question, though: After all the time and care that you put into
>slowly developing the relationship between John and Delenn, why did
>you choose not to show their wedding onscreen? I can think of several
>perfectly legitimate reasons for doing this and am mainly curious as
>to what factors went into that decision.
This was something I debated back and forth for quite some time. I finally
came to the idea of having it happen off-camera because I thought, frankly,
that it would come off as corny to show it; it would be an obvious appeal to
ratings and the like, and I tend to shy away from that.
jms
Date: 21 Oct 1997 10:21:05 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: ENGAME & WRITING*****SPOILERS****
>1. When you write, do you put in the "change of scene" to the special
>effects scenes - the scenes which will be added after the cast filming -
>or do you format the final product after the effects are done - in
>editing?
I don't quite understand the question...all of the show, every single shot, CGI
or live-action, is spelled out in the script, which is given to the various
departments to make it happen.
The best way I can demonstrate this is if you want to go to your local library
and find a copy of my writing book, and check the script for The Coming of
Shadows against the episode.
>2. How much of the final product is like what you have imagined?? More?
>Less? Do you ever change the layout of an episode BECAUSE of the
>finished visuals?
It's generally 80-110% of what I saw in my head. Sometimes I'll shift around
the scenes to better the flow of an episode once we see how they look on film.
jms
Date: 23 Oct 1997 05:52:54 -0400
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS, B5 Cookbook???
The book is being edited now, and I should get it soon, so expect it about
Christmastime.
Basically, I just think it'll be a hoot. The recipes are real, with
substitutions if you can't get the real thing from offworld caterers, and it's
set right in the B5 universe, as if it were written in that time period, with
all the usual Chef attitude that goes into it.
I was kinda doubtful when WB first proposed it, and I still haven't seen the
final manuscript, but I think it could be kinda fun.
jms
Date: 26 Oct 1997 03:16:28 -0500
Subject: Re: Attn JMS: Season 5 writing style
>Now that B5 has a guarenteed station and timeslot, and the previous
>seasons will be run 5 days a week, does that mean you will be writing
>season 5 with less of the recaps and other nods to "people just tuning
>in"?
>If you see a Klingon on Star Trek, or Cancer Man on X-Files, or Sideshow
>Bob on the Simpsons, etc. etc. ad nauseam, they don't stop and point out
>when and where we saw them before; they just go.
Difference is, this is a continuing storyline, and so I think you do need to
have the occasional bit of exposition in there for the folks who don't (or
can't) watch and track every single episode. You should be able to come in at
any point in the story, and watch an episode, and get something satisfying out
of it.
Doesn't really have anything to do with the time slot, it has to do with being
fair to the majority of the audience.
jms
Date: 26 Oct 1997 13:14:01 -0500
Subject: Re: Rising Star ( *Spoilers* )
No, Sinclair's middle name was David, not Sheridan.
jms
Date: 26 Oct 1997 13:18:25 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Sierra really has some fine people
>Not only that, but "The Official Guide to J. Michael
>Straczynski's Babylon 5" sounds like one wonderful CD ROM...
I was very iffy on that...I am getting this vague sense that I'm becoming a
brand name, and I'm suspicious of that sort of thing. At first they wanted it
in a proprietary sense, "J. Michael Straczynski's Guide to the Babylon 5
Universe," but I vetoed that because Jason Brezhinski did 90% of the actual
work on the thing, researching every smallest detail shown in the series, and
if anyone should get that credit, it's him. The final title only came about
through a lot of haggling.
jms
Date: 26 Oct 1997 13:19:02 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS what's left for S5
Things that *could* show up (leaving in some ambiguity just to keep some
surprises):
The start of the telepath war
The start of drakh war
Londo's fate on Centauri Prime
The first year trying to make the Interstellar Alliance work
Inter-faction fighting among the Alliance members
The development of Mars as an independent state
The legacy of William Edgars' black projects
Fallout from the civil war, and the feelings about it
How Lennier, Sheridan and Delenn will get along now
How's that just for starters?
jms
Date: 26 Oct 1997 18:54:38 -0500
Subject: Re: TNT - Reshowing All episodes, 5 days a week Question
Yes, seasons 1-4 will be shown in the proper order, AND it's 6 days a week, not
5, they'll also do Saturday.
TNT: All B5, All the Time.
jms
Date: 27 Oct 1997 15:03:14 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN: JMS - you fink... :-> Rising Star (*spoilers*)
>After YEARS of buildup, you held John and Delenn's wedding off camera.
>A-HEM! You sir, are a fink... :->
You're such a sweet-talker....
jms
Date: 27 Oct 1997 15:07:32 -0500
Subject: Re: 422, Questions and observations, SPOILERS
>I was surprised that CC was cut from the opening credits. I was under
>the impression that if an actor A appeared as character X in Y number of
>episodes per year, actor A was entitled (actor's guild rules??) to an
>opening credit in every episode that season.
Because Claudia was in the original 422, it changed the way we had to do the
credits, since that won't air until 5th season.
>In the end, life looks
>promising, but the getting ther part is pretty ugly.
>
>
Yep, that's the way it usuallly is.
jms
Date: 28 Oct 1997 02:02:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Emotional Reactions to "Deconstruction"? ****SPOILERS
I think it's fair to say that Sinclair has been in large measure forgotten by
Earth by the time of Deconstruction...but Valen lives on in the memories of
the Minbari...a reasonable trade-off.
jms
Date: 28 Oct 1997 02:05:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Good supporting characters(possible spoilers for EndGame and
>And the President in Rising Star, which I loved, had such a bad Russian
>accent I couldn't get past it.
I love comments like that.
Beata, who played the President, is a native-born Russian.
jms
Date: 29 Oct 1997 21:02:54 -0500
Subject: Re: Deconstruction of Falling Stars- Spoilers**
>SPOILERS FOR DECONSTRUCTION OF FALLING STARS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Just a few quick reactions:
>(although I did comment on the fact that they
> were still using English in a million years)
That's what you heard, that doesn't mean that's what it was; same as when you
go to Minbar, they're not speaking English, that's just our hearing of it.
> BTW when was the last time anyone heard a news anchor talk
> about the old testament?
Ted Koppel.
> the portrait of him as a kid done in Black and White. What they
> ran out of color film?
Even now portraits are often done in black and white just for artistic merit.
> (although I have a problem with the idea that NYU will be
> around 100 years from NOW!)
Trinity College is a working college in Ireland that dates back to the American
Revolution.
jms
Date: 29 Oct 1997 21:04:36 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: If you had a million more dollars a show...
> What made you decide on the # of shows to do a year. =
>DS9 for instance does 26 I believe. Dd the number 22 seem right, or is =
>that standard TV practice?
22 is what a network needs each season to get its money back.
>If you had a million more dollars a show, what would you do with it?
I'd blow the sides off your TV set.
jms
Date: 29 Oct 1997 21:06:51 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: voiceovers for S5 ads/trailers
We had nothing to do with the promos, so the guy probably worked only for WB.
jms
Date: 30 Oct 1997 01:12:41 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS - Re: Deconstruction of Falling Stars- Spoilers**
RE: what I do and don't respond to...often the criticisms you note as "meaty"
(including some of those you raise) are in large measure subjective...why did
I do *this* instead of *that* because the correspondent in question thinks X
should be done instead of or in addition to Y. There is no way to actually
debate that, or answer it, because it's subjective...what you want in a story
may not be what I want, but too often because it isn't what someone else would
do, or like, it's "bad." Or a plot hole.
So it isn't so much as responding to the nitpicky notes as those that can be
objectively answered.
jms
Date: 30 Oct 1997 15:54:45 -0500
Subject: Rising Star ( *Spoilers* )
Spoilers for Rising Star
>1.Did you come up with Zathras(and Zathras, and Zathras, etc.)before
>your morning coffee?
After. Caffeine akes all the difference in the world.
>2.Can we assume that the wonderful little scene of Londo and G'Kar, at
>the end of Rising Star, wondering how it was going in the Sheridan
>bedroom, and the EYE being misplaced, says a little something about
>Vous????
Absolutely not.
By the way...that's a nice outfit.
jms
Date: 30 Oct 1997 19:02:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Attn JMS: Deconstruction and Sinclair
>Were the headlines picked to foreshadow some events?
In several cases, yes.
jms
Date: 31 Oct 1997 01:25:44 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Earth:FC a B5 redux?
>I've watched the first three "Earth: Final Conflict" (EFC) episodes that
>have shown in my area. I recall that you were offered the opportunity
>to participate in its production and turned that down. Is it fair to
>surmise now that, compared to "Babylon 5", EFC only offered you a "been
>there, done that" experience?
Not really...but a) I want to do my own projects, b) it would always be first a
GR show not a JMS show, c) I had a suspicion htere would be hassles from ST
fans over it, and d) the story just didn't appeal to me. I only do stuff I
can be excited about; life's too short to do otherwise.
jms
jms
Date: 31 Oct 1997 01:32:36 -0500
Subject: Re: to JMS: deconstruction
It depends on your point of view.
The fact, as I see it, is that no one and nothing will ever solve all of our
problems at once, now and forever. People will always be people. You can't
wave a magic wand and fix it all.
Yes, there was another war...but had the Shadows not been stopped by our
characters, there likely wouldn't have been a human race at ALL anymore.
Yes, there was a war, and many died in it...as tends to happen in war...but the
nominal right side in it came out on top, which would not have been the case
but for Garibaldi's simulacra giving them a leg up on things.
We have had, continue to have, and will always have wars, and grief, and
struggle...we will climb up and fall down...but each time we climb a little
higher, and in the end, we *do* build the world that our ancestors would have
wanted for us...we *do* leave the cradle at last, and we take our place among
the stars teaching those who follow us.
For my money, that's as happy an ending as we or anyone can ever hope for.
jms
Date: 31 Oct 1997 21:02:39 -0500
Subject: Re: ATTN JMS: Are you going to do this again??
> I was wondering, *if* Crusade becomes a reality....
> Are you really going to subject yourself to this Usenet thing
>again? Not only is it tough on you as far as the hours you keep, but
>this isn't exactly joyride either.
Not as much, no.
I promised I'd stay online in a major way as long as the show was being
broadcast to continue the online experiment...but once that's done, I've
already decided that I have to pull back and not be as substantive a presence
as I've been until now.
I won't get off altogether -- I'm an onliner and have been since 1985 and I'm
too old and cranky to start making major changes to my lifestyle now -- but
some of the destructiveness of some of the stalkers out there has taken a real
toll on me over the years. So I'll still be *around*, here and there, but not
as constant or major a way as present.
jms