sum1

(

Cryostar

Actually, I was referring to the fact that Dr. Franklin will more than likely be written out of the Movie. I'm assuming that JMS will end up casting a new doctor and Franklin will be on assignment elsewhere.

sum1

Rewatching B5 season 1. Still majorly pissed about Sinclair being replaced by Sheridan. Boxleitner did a very good job as Sheridan (particularly in season 5), but it was nothing on O'Hare's marvellous work as Sinclair. Dumping Sinclair was a massive mistake.

Even at its beginning, B5 was better than any other space opera show I've seen. None of the Trek shows match up, Andromeda doesn't even rate, the new Battlestar Galactica is empty by comparison, the 2 Dune mini series pale next it, Farscape has nothing on it, etc.

Not to mention the much-talked-about Firefly. "f i r e f l y" is another way to spell "o v e r r a t e d". Well-made, but totally lacking a deeper heart. Too busy being flashy cutting edge and smirking at its own cleverness to truly care about its characters. Joss Whedon without SMG? Hmmm... ATS in its first season wasn't great, just good, and after that it stank. Yep, Joss without Sarah Michelle Gellar certainly doesn't impress me all that much.

People act like Firefly is the second coming or something, but it pales next to something from over a decade back. I watch B5's first ep and I find I care about Sinclair and co. I watch Firefly and I couldn't care less about Mal. Inara and Wash and Book are good and I like them... but they don't really enormously move me. And the rest don't matter to me at all. The show fails to make them really touch me. And I spend the whole time wondering when they're gonna realize how stupid they look using revolvers in a space opera.

Cryostar

You have to admit, though, for the 10 episodes that aired, it was fairly decent. The talent was there, and the world that they tried to develop was bold. It might not have been original, but it was decent.

Getting back on topic, I watched EndGame again today. I so love the space battle on that. The speech he gives before the orbital platforms open fire is great.

sum1

Decent yeah, but it only went so far. It wasn't the masterpiece people act like it was. It was lacking something crucial.
Heckuvan episode that one.

Cryostar

It's hard to stand in judgement though on the series, since it wasn't given a chance. Not even a full season.

That it was...just something about the way Sheridan goes, "Delenn, we need you." and her simple answer of, "We are there." Still sends chills down my back. Knowing what the minbari alone can bring to the table.

sum1

I don't really agree, because I can see the quality of stuff like B5, BTVS, Roswell, etc already showing up in the first 10 eps or so. Even though those weren't at their full power then, they nonetheless showed already that they had special quality. Firefly just doesn't have that sort of quality. And it's not something it could have developed later, because a crucial part of the show's problem is with its foundation attitude, its basic approach. If it stayed the same show at all, it couldn't change that. Firefly was overrated and I think it being cancelled early actually encourages that overrating, making it easier to make a myth out of it and giving it sympathy points. All the more so with the big Joss Whedon name attached to it.

For one thing, I think Firefly is a lot more shallow than it wants to be seen as, a lot more surface than genuine human depth. And I think more surface than depth is a problem with a lot of sf tv these days, something that needs to be confronted and changed.

KendraFan2

I consider SG scifi,but I agree with Harlan Ellison that there is a difference between scifi and science fiction.Which brings me to Babylon 5.

Although I enjoyed it,I was not a big fan of B5.The acting was excellent,the special effects were good(especially the make-up they used for the aliens),the character development was good(everyone seemed three dimensional),the stories and storyline was pretty good particularly how they merged the past,present and future.Unfortunately,as well produced as it was,very little was actually based on hard science.Even Star Trek with its technobabble is based on scientific theory.Telepaths,organic ships,immortal races fighting a battle between good and evil,that could easily fall into the realm of fantasy(like Star Wars).

Cryostar

But you like Farscape....

Hey KendraFan...you watch that Starwars throwing there....*cackle*

sum1

Screw hard science. Science fiction is fiction, not science. And the fantasy element to B5 just makes it deeper and better. Similarly, the fantasy element in Star Wars is part of what made it good.
But if Claudia wasn't in it, I wouldn't really be interested.

Cryostar

Smirk....

Actually, there has to be science for it to be science fiction.....literary fact!

sum1

Pseudo-science will do fine. And B5 and Star Wars had quite sufficient. No further science required.

KendraFan2

You're kinda just making up your own definitions now.

sum1

No I'm not, I'm just refusing to accept some narrow science-enthusiast definition of sf.

Cryostar

Actually, it's the general definition that most science fiction college courses are guided by. There is a definitive line between sci/fi and fantasy. Dealing with the metaphysical is definitely fantasy.