No matter how hard I try, I can't stand Babylon 5

POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 2, 2008 22:30
VIEWED: 5200
PAGE 3 of 3

PREV PAGE 1 2 3

CANTTAKESKY

Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:15 PM

Auraptor,

You're not the only one. I've tried, and tried. Then people said, you have to watch it from the beginning. So I put the whole series on my rental queue to start at the beginning. After the first 2 discs, I took it off my queue. Watching it feels like work; I have to work to keep my eyes peeled while counting the minutes until it ends. I feel it's my duty as a die-hard sci-fi fan to put in my time. There's something wrong with that.

I can't get into Farscape either, even when I start from the beginning.

Now I never got into Buffy, but once I started at the beginning, I understood it and enjoyed it. Still don't like it enough to buy the series, but I'm glad I gave it a shot.

Angel, I got right away. Firefly I got right away. Dark Angel I got right away. Maybe it's just me, but I think I know pretty early on if I'll like something or not.

--------------------------
Entertainment shouldn't feel like work.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:

Entertainment shouldn't feel like work.

That's exactly how I felt about SciFi's Dune. I MADE myself watch the whole thing.

Then I went back to the Lynch version, heh heh.

Lazy Chrisisall

MAL4PREZ

Wednesday, March 26, 2008 3:30 PM

Someone whose taste I respect greatly recommended B5 to me, and went so far as to lend me season 1 with a list of the episodes that are worth watching and those I should skip. (She admits that some eps are horrible.) But, just like when it was on TV, I find myself watching 5 minutes and losing interest.

What the hell is it? I agree Auraptor, I can't quite put my finger on why I can't stand this show. Maybe it has to do with the costumes and sets. Or, like you say, the acting is forced. It just looks fake, and I have a hard time believing these are real people in some real place. Not like Firefly, which I fell for immediately.

It's a shame. I really do want to get into the storylines of B5 that I've heard are so good. I just can't stand it long enough to watch full episodes.

Maybe I should just skip ahead to season 2...

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

SPACEANJL

Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:22 PM

The ideas behind Bab-5 were really good, but the execution, if not exactly sucking, was not as good as it could have been.

But it had some funny bits (the Streibs, anyone? - the descendants suing for loss of earnings was hysterical) and some really interesting debates on ethics (medical intervention) Lots of stuff on souls and past lives for those that way inclined. And the Sheridan/B4 twist? Excellent, if odd.

Plus a cod-Arthurian vibe with Delenn, Sinclair and Lennier.

The Psi Corps were even creepier than the Blue Hands guys - I mean, the whole sleeper agent thing? And the politics between the other races made humans almost an irrelevance. The whole story arc with Londo and G'Kar...oh, my god, I still remember all the names. I only ever saw it once.

Still, it didn't quite grab me the way Firefly did.

Maybe they had too many things going on, trying to fit into the storylines. But it was a step forward from the perfect plasticity of the Ikeaverse as given to us by Roddenbury. (Let's not even go into 'Andromeda' - I am the avatar of the sun - what?!) I think it paved the way for the idea of a future that was neither utopia or dystopia, but just folks.

Have to say, never could get into Farscape, either.

DEEPGIRL187

Thursday, March 27, 2008 2:39 PM

I was an even bigger fan of Farscape. Whereas Babylon 5 seemed more plot-driven, Farscape paid much more attention to its characters, which were all great fun to watch, IMO. John became a vastly different person over the course of the series, and for that matter, so did everyone else. Farscape was probably the first show that really gave me an appreciation of sci-fi television (and probably led me to watching Firefly as well).

I will admit that if you start watching in the middle, you'll be lost. I started during season two or three, and even after watching for awhile, hadn't figured out all of the storylines.

****************************************************

"This is my timey-wimey detector. It goes ding when there's stuff. Also, it can boil an egg at 30 paces, whether you want it to or not, actually, so I've learned to stay away from hens. It's not pretty when they blow."

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

Friday, March 28, 2008 2:43 PM

Quote:
That's exactly how I felt about SciFi's Dune. I MADE myself watch the whole thing.

Then I went back to the Lynch version, heh heh.

Lazy Chrisisall

I agree with Chris on this one. I do however feel that to aquire the complete dune experience, one needs to combine lynch's movie with Sci-Fi's version. Lynch nailed the feel of the dune verse but made up some silly plot points, sci-fi got the plot right but made the world look stupid. As a sidenote, sci-fi found their redemption with Children of Dune. The stupid costuming of Dune was eliminated and the book is followed closely.

As to Bab 5, I recall in 1993 there was a huge controversy twixt DS9 and the Bab 5 people. J. Michael Straczynski claimed that he proposed his inital script to producers who rejected it in 1991 and 92. Finally as he was gearing up for Bab 5 season 1 in 93, he learned that people affliated with the orginal script rejections were collaberating with the Trek folks on DS9. He claimed that his concept of a narrative centered around a static location (a space station) was stolen. Perhaps it was...perhaps not. In the end, Straczynski let it go, never filing suit. Although at cons if the subject is broached he'll be sour.

My point is this. During these last 3 months I have had the chance to sit and watch all 5 seasons of Bab 5 along with 7 seasons of DS9. What I've determined (pure opinion here, don't get mad at me if you like bab5) is that DS9 is better. Bab 5 seasons 1 & 5 are kinda silly. Season 5 especially. I had to FORCE myself to endure the long drag out towards the end of 5..truely painful indeed. The heart of the plot is concentrated in seasons 2,3,&4. Personally, I have no doubt that Straczynski had "vision". Bab5 is not written like lost, where characters seem to blunder around as a function of writers who haven't thought very far ahead. All 5 seasons were fleshed out before the pilot ever aired. However, this will not serve Straczynski well when one considers the failures of seasons 1 & 5. The honest hard truth about bab 5 is that it's actually a 3 season show pulled like taffy into 5. This is why I think it appears hollow to modern viewers.

DS9 on the other hand really stands up to the test of time. The plots are crisp, the continuity is solid, character developments are good. So I'm forced to ask myself, if DS9 was "stolen" why is it better? I think the answer lies in the Trek writers who were plucked from TNG. These fellows made their mistakes too, but these occured years before in 1987-89 with TNG seasons 1&2. By 1993 they are honed, lean, and mean with plenty of practice making the great TNG episodes of TNG seasons 3,4,&5. While I have no doubt that DS9 was written without true "vision", the writers paid close attention to development of characters and things stayed fresh at all times (with the notable exception of the very end). The writting staff for DS9 was therefore "nimble", able to collaberate and work as a team as opposed to Straczynski who held his show in an iron claw...accepting no criticism and trying to manage all the small details. Joss himself has said that unwillingness to collaberate kills the creative process. Think about any of the buffy/firefly episodes you've watched with Joss commentaries active (OIS comes to mind). Often Joss will discuss a particular scene you're viewing and describe how his original vision had been shifted slightly by the imput of others who "tweaked" small details. This is how the great Sci-Fi is made.

Both DS9 & Bab5 exhibit poor CGI, but this is a product of the times. Please recall that the CGI quality of 1995 is light-years behind CGI renderings in 2000, a meer 5 years later. Some of the best Dr. Who plots exist in the 70's when effects are stone-age pathetic. To grade any show lower based on CGI concerns would be unfair.

Perhaps my ramblings don't encapsulate the Bab 5 issues well enough. Here's a couple articles that echo my feelings. Perhaps they shall be insightful:

http://www.pheasnt.demon.co.uk/Pheasan

MAJORLYCOOL

Friday, March 28, 2008 5:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
Auraptor,

You're not the only one. I've tried, and tried. Then people said, you have to watch it from the beginning. So I put the whole series on my rental queue to start at the beginning. After the first 2 discs, I took it off my queue. Watching it feels like work; I have to work to keep my eyes peeled while counting the minutes until it ends. I feel it's my duty as a die-hard sci-fi fan to put in my time. There's something wrong with that. Entertainment shouldn't feel like work.

Perfectly said. I watched the pilot last night after a friend recommended this show to me. I never bothered with it when it was on the air. I was falling asleep while it was on and simply couldn't wait for it to be over so I could say I gave it a shot. Has Firefly ruined me? lol

I swallowed a bug.

IMNOTHERE

Wednesday, April 2, 2008 10:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:

Lynch nailed the feel of the dune verse but made up some silly plot points, sci-fi got the plot right but made the world look stupid.

I'd say they decided to go with the Dune = Macbeth (only Macbeth wins) angle and deliberately made it look like a stage play. Having the Baron break into rhyming couplets is the giveaway... Interesting that Sci-Fi Channel Dune comes up in the same breath as B5 - I'd agree that they have similar ...attributes (see earlier point about B5 being in the style of classical tragedy rather than modern pseudo-realistic TV).

Quote:

He claimed that his concept of a narrative centered around a static location (a space station) was stolen.

Well there are some other similarities:

* Said static location becomes the front line in a big interstellar war (OK that's sorta predictable)
* Big blue swirly thing parked next to space station leads to exotic places...
* Major plot point is the volatile peace between a newly liberated planet (Narn/Bajor) and their former oppressors (Centauri/Cardassia) - who later ally themselves with the Big Bad Guys in an effort to recapture their former glory.
* Main protagonist is damaged goods from a war that Earth nearly lost (Minbari War/Borg attack)
* Main human protagonist turns out to be a messiah figure in the religion of one of the alien races
* Transgender (ish) major character: Delenn was originally going to be a male until her transformation at the end of S1 and subsequent romantic entanglement with the captain (they dropped the idea while making the pilot). Dax turns out to be Sisko's old mentor and drinking buddy in a hot new sleeve...
* Sheridan falls down a big fiery hole in the ground, dies, and is resurrected. Sisko falls down a big fiery hole in the ground and is reborn into the spirit world. (OK, so they might have got that idea from some other famous work of fantasy).

Of course, that could all be coincidence - e.g. the role of the UN in former Yugoslavia was topical at the time.

Quote:

However, this will not serve Straczynski well when one considers the failures of seasons 1 & 5. The honest hard truth about bab 5 is that it's actually a 3 season show pulled like taffy into 5. This is why I think it appears hollow to modern viewers.

Presumably you know the genesis of Season 5: While they were making Season 4 the chances of getting renewed were looking remote, so JMS upped the pace and finished the story in Season 4. The show got renewed just in time to shoot a filler episode to end S4 so the in-the-can series finale could be postponed to the end of S5.

As for Season 1 - that might have been pressure to make the show more "episodic" to satisfy the studio - since the common wisdom at the time was "Space Opera = Star Trek = Episodic". Trouble is - you had to be concentrating because when they entitled the season "Signs and Portents" they weren't kidding: there's a clue or two in every episode.

I'd fully agree that B5 done in 3-4 seasons of 13 episodes would have been much better...

Quote:

DS9 on the other hand really stands up to the test of time.

Beg to differ - DS9 has been recently re-shown on UK TV and I found it hard to stay awake through an episode. When DS9 was good it was very good (Pale Moonlight, Tribbles, the one where Sisko is a 1930s SF hack spring to mind) but it never seemed to follow through, and the stuff in between is just plain bland.

What if Sisko did suffer a mental breakdown? What if Ezri Dax's shotgun joining did leave her incompetent, but Sisko was too loyal to see it? What if the threat of the Dominion seriously corrupted the Federation?

Yes, DS9 takes some of the gloss off the Federation - but B5 gives us Earth descending into fascism one little step at a time, B5s secession and the aftermath, the civil war and the aftermath of that.

B5 went places like that and let the stories develop over the seasons. DS9 danced around them then activated the Plot Res

PREV PAGE 1 2 3