Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5

Öjevind Lång happily swam across a river of CHOKLIT:
> I've spent much of the holiday seson watching Babylon 5 on DVD. In Episode 3
> of the Second Season, "The Geometry of Shadows", the technomage Elric says:
> "There is an old saying: 'Do not try the patience of wizards, for they are
> subtle and quick to anger'." Of course, that is a direct adaption of the
> proverb quoted by Gildor Inglorion in "Three is Company": "Do not meddle in
> the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger". Perhaps
> this isn't news to others here, but it was to me. It gave me a kick,
> actually. (The quote is mentioned in the Wikipedia article about
> technomages, but attritbuted to Gandalf. I'll go change that now.)

My sister bought that a while ago and I've watched some of it with her.
There is also a reference to the Centauri god Morgoth (who, I believe,
is the god of the dead and thresholds), a reference to Lennier being in
his eleventy-something year at some point, and references to dark things
stretching out their hands (or something similar).

Ermanna the Lady of Imladris

You can never become whole unless you embrace the weirdness in
yourself. Celaeno
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

John W. Kennedy <jwkenne DeleteThis @attglobal.net> wrote:
> Dirk Thierbach wrote:

>>>>> (BIGGEST POSSIBLE SPOILER FOR "BABYLON 5")
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x
>>>>> x

[snip]
>> Is that what you meant by "horrible wrong"? If yes, then my idea of
>> "horrible wrong" is maybe different

>> BTW, the Arisians are not that benificient, either, [...]

> You can reason like that, if you wish, but in "Doc" Smith's mind, the
> Children of the Lens are Good, the Arisians are Good,

Quite possible, though I am not so sure. Another thing I discovered
on re-reading is that "Doc" Smith seemed to be quite aware that he
was writing "pulp", so maybe he did some things on purpose. I don't
know.

Anyway, I just wanted to explain why, to me (and maybe to JMS too, who
might have seen that as well) the Arisian/Eddorian theme isn't so much
different from the Vorlon/Shadow theme. I tend to look at what people
do, not what they say or what is said about them, and I have the
feeling from what I have seen of JMS choose that he might think
similarly.

If you really reduce the Lensmen story to a "Good" and "Evil" side,
then of course you have a point in saying that it goes horribly wrong.
So now I understand what you mean (which was why I was asking).

>> I wouldn't have minded the twist that "Vorlons do it out of
>> self-interest, too",

> Not "self-interest". Plain old swamp-sucking pride. "Because I'm the
> Mommy -- that's why!"

Hm. I must have suppressed my memory of this episode quite thoroughly.
Probably for some reason

> He doesn't "turn the tables"; that's the point. He /can't/ beat the
> Shadows or the Vorlons.

Yes. So he just talks to them, and they disappear. How realistic is
that? Neither the Vorlons nor the Shadows are stupid. Either they
don't care for the consequences, and they have some ideologic interest
in what they are doing, and then they'll go on until they are clearly
defeated by the other side. Or, they are accessible to logical arguments,
and then they wouldn't have done such a idiotic thing in the first place.

> What he can do is engineer a stalemate and point it out to them.

As I said, my memory is fuzzy, but I didn't perceive it as a
stalemate.

> Fortunately for Sheridan, the Shadows and the Vorlons,
> unlike certain US presidents of late, get the point.

Yes. See above.

> Someone once asked JMS what B5 was about, and he answered, "The need to
> kill your parents."

Which I would also classify as something that goes "horribly wrong":
Some directors, especially American ones, seem to feel the need to
reduce everything to family relationships (there are enough other
famous examples). I really don't know why.

- Dirk
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:36:36 -0500, "John W. Kennedy"
<jwkenne RemoveThis @attglobal.net> wrote:

>Paul S. Person wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 19:02:00 +0100, "Öjevind Lång"
>> <bredband.net RemoveThis @ojevind.lang> wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>>> I've read a lot of the information in Wikipedia about the show, as well as
>>> read comments here, and I believe you are right. (I have also seen one of
>>> the TV films made about B5, the one about the Rangers; it was not very good,
>>> I thought.) But I will definitely get hold of the DVD boxes containing
>>> Seasons 3-5 too.
>>
>> I saw the whole thing on Sci-Fi in "letterboxed" format (which, I
>> believe, means that the top and bottom of the original image were cut
>> off). The actual series is definitely worth seeing, at least once.
>
>Not precisely. The original series was made wide-screen, but shown
>center-only, and, to save computer time, the side panels were only
>wireframed and not rendered when CGI was involved. "Plenty of time to
>complete the rendering when HDTV comes in," they reasoned.
>
>Then some drooling idiot at Warner Brothers lost all the CGI master
>files, and the ability to render the side panels was lost forever,
>unless either the masters are rediscovered or WB decides to go to the
>considerable expense of doing all the CGI over again from scratch (as
>has recently been done for ST:TOS, so it's not impossible).
>
>So the DVDs show more than the original broadcasts when the scene is all
>live action, because the sides have been added, but show less when there
>is CGI, because the top and bottom had to be trimmed to match the live
>action.

I stand semi-corrected: the live-action sequences showed /more than/
the full-screen version; the CGI-infested sequences showed /less than/
the full-screen version.

Your explanation sounded very very familiar. Looks like my memory
dropped the details while retaining the fact that this was not
"letterboxed" in the usual sense of showing more picture!
--
"A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature,
but contrary to what we know as nature."
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

"?jevind L?ng" <bredband.net.RemoveThis@ojevind.lang> wrote:
> Incidentally, it is strange how one's perception of certain
> characters in the show changes. When I saw the pilot film, I
> detested G'Kar. [...] Ambassador Mollari [...] The development of
> Vir Cotto from a clown into someone to respect and like is also
> stimulating.

"No one here is exactly what he appears."

And Andreas Katsulas and Peter Jurasik are really great actors.

> Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks that Mollari seems to be to
> some extent a caricature of Napoleon?

IIRC, JMS said something like that the whole Centauri society is somewhat
napoleonic.

> Ob Tolkien: I believe one can characterize the relation between the Minbari
> and the Earthers as to some extent similar to that between Tolkien's Elves
> and Men.

Yes, and you're not the first to notice. And given the relations between
Vorlons and Minbari, what does that make the Vorlons? (In this context,
of course).

> There is even, we learn, the occasional marriage between Minbari
> and Earther, with tremendous consequences.

It's actually more complicated then you probably yet know...

- Dirk
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

Paul S. Person wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:15:19 -0700, "Michelle J. Haines"
> <mhaines.RemoveThis@nanc.com> wrote:
>
>> Paul S. Person wrote:
>>>
>>> I saw the whole thing on Sci-Fi in "letterboxed" format (which, I
>>> believe, means that the top and bottom of the original image were cut
>>> off). The actual series is definitely worth seeing, at least once.
>> *laughs gently* No, silly. Letterbox means it's filmed widescreen, and
>> when you see it in fullscreen TV format, the sides are cut off to make
>> it fit the TV. When you see it in letterbox, you're seeing the whole
>> picture, not cut.
>
> Usually, yes. However, I believe B5 was filmed for TV, and at 1.33:1.
> This is, IIRC, based on statements made on Usenet when this happened.

They filmed B5 in widescreen, for TV and all.

Michelle
Flutist
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 16:00:43 -0700, "Michelle J. Haines"
<mhaines.TakeThisOut@nanc.com> wrote:

>Paul S. Person wrote:
>> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:15:19 -0700, "Michelle J. Haines"
>> <mhaines.TakeThisOut@nanc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Paul S. Person wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I saw the whole thing on Sci-Fi in "letterboxed" format (which, I
>>>> believe, means that the top and bottom of the original image were cut
>>>> off). The actual series is definitely worth seeing, at least once.
>>> *laughs gently* No, silly. Letterbox means it's filmed widescreen, and
>>> when you see it in fullscreen TV format, the sides are cut off to make
>>> it fit the TV. When you see it in letterbox, you're seeing the whole
>>> picture, not cut.
>>
>> Usually, yes. However, I believe B5 was filmed for TV, and at 1.33:1.
>> This is, IIRC, based on statements made on Usenet when this happened.
>
>They filmed B5 in widescreen, for TV and all.

Read John W. Kennedy's post: the widescreen version cuts off the top
and bottom of every segment which includes CGI. Only the live-action
segments are "widescreen" in the commonly-used sense of the term.

I, myself, do not consider 1.85:1 to be "widescreen": it is merely the
latest standard screen ratio. 2.35:1, on the other hand, is
widescreen. Both are letterboxed on a TV set (even an HDTV -- 16:9 is
1.78:1, not 1.85:1).

I realize, however, that the term "widescreen" is commonly used as a
substitute for "letterboxed at the top and bottom". A 1.37:1 movie on
a 16:9 HDTV would be "letterboxed" on the sides, and so certainly not
"widescreen" in any sense.

Some full-screen films are "unrolled": they were shot at 1.37:1, shown
at 2.35:1 in theaters, and the "full screen" version shows the full
1.37:1 negative, so there is nothing missing on the sides. You do, I
am told, in some cases get to see boom mikes and cables at the top and
bottom that the properly-framed version hides. /Apollo 13/ is, IIRC,
one such, making it a poor choice for demonstrating the advantages of
letterboxed versus fullscreen. (I don't know about the unrolling part,
but one of the "special features" on the DVD clearly shows the
director looking at a display showing the 2.35:1 rectangle imposed on
the 1.37:1 image, presumably so he can make sure the intended aspect
ratio will work).

And, for those of us who care about OAR (original aspect ratio),
things get even murkier. Thus, there is a Cronenberg film (I forget
which) which IMdB states was shown in theaters at 1.85:1 but all three
DVD versions are at 1.66:1 -- and the Criterion web site claims that
that is Cronenberg's preferred ratio (presumably it is unrolled rather
than chopped off). Disney generally letterboxes non-1.37:1 films;
however, both /The Sword in the Stone/ and /Darby O'Gill and the
Little People/ are presented full frame "as originally intended"
(which probably means unrolled). I have seen assertions that /Darby
O'Gill/ was intended to be shown at 1.37:1 but the theater-owners
insisted on showing it at 1.75:1 because their audiences preferred
wider films. I suspect that the fullscreen /The Creature from the
Black Lagoon/ is another such case, but cannot be certain. On IMdB I
have seen at least one film where the 35-mm and 70-mm version (in one
case), or the American and Dutch version (in another case) have
different intended aspect ratios. So neither "letterboxed" nor
"widescreen" necessarily means that you are seeing the film as shown
in theaters.

So, if the B5 DVDs are letterboxed, then the top and bottom is
(presumably) missing from every scene involving CGI. And the world of
correct aspect ratios is not as simple as I would like it to be.
--
"A portent, therefore, happens not contrary to nature,
but contrary to what we know as nature."
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

"John W. Kennedy" <jwkenne RemoveThis @attglobal.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:477e887e$0$9133$607ed4bc@cv.net...
> Öjevind Lång wrote:
>> Incidentally, it is strange how one's perception of certain characters in
>> the show changes. When I saw the pilot film, I detested G'Kar. Then I saw
>> that film about the Rangers and realized there was another, very humane
>> side to him. And then, watching the first two seasons,
>>
>> s
>> p
>> o
>> i
>> l
>> e
>> r
>>
>> s
>> p
>> a
>> c
>> e
>>
>> I found that the Narn had every reason to hate the Centaurians, who had
>> behaved abominbly to them. And then Ambassador Mollari sides with some
>> really bad guys, and his people proceed to behave even worse than they
>> did the first time over, while G'Kar acts with honour and dignity - and
>> he was also prepared to shake hands and make up with Mollari after the
>> Centauri Emperor's peace speech.
>
> That's the glory of the show. The obvious villain turns into a martyr, and
> the writer's chief spokesman, the obvious comic relief turns into a
> villain, and then from being a villain turns into a tragic hero, and the
> obvious bitch-queen turns into the show's romantic leading lady (who can
> still handle herself in a low-class bar).

Is that Delenn? No, can't be. She's never a bitch queen.

> As a part-time actor myself, I am in awe of that show. If I had been on
> the west coast in the 90's, I think I might have turned pro just for the
> chance to be on B5. In its way, it's almost as good as Shakespeare.

I have,as I've said, only seen the pilot episode, two of the films made for
TV and the first two seasons, but I do think the series is outstanding.

>> Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks that Mollari seems to be to
>> some extent a caricature of Napoleon? He wears something rather close to
>> the uniform Napoleon habitually wore, and his hair reminds you of the
>> kind of hat Napoleon wore. And he has a big portrait of himself on the
>> wall - a truly Napoleonian touch!
>
> It's a given in the show that, ever since the Centauri discovered Earth,
> antique Earth fashions have been all the rage at the Centauri court. In
> fact, that's how Earth got to be a Great Power in only one hundred years.
> ("Don't you just love this dress pattern?" "Great Maker, yes! I'll give
> you the secret of FTL for it!")

LOL - no matter they lost their empire with such a shallow attitude.
By the way, in the pilot episode, it is stated that the Narn had atatcked
several less poweerful species. I have seen no mention of that in the series
so far. Did that item just disappear?
I also noticed that parts of Babylon 5 (the space station,t hat is) looked
different in the pilot than in the main series; and, of course, that some of
the aliens looked disturtbingly like muppets. I'm glad they have up on the
animation stuff for them. However, the humans also look less diverse in the
main show, and I find that a bit sad.
Also, the Exo, Takashima, had been replaced with Ivanova, which I would
say was an improvement.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

Öjevind Lång wrote:
> Is that Delenn? No, can't be. She's never a bitch queen.

It was what we were set up to expect by the pilot.

> By the way, in the pilot episode, it is stated that the Narn had atatcked
> several less poweerful species. I have seen no mention of that in the series
> so far. Did that item just disappear?

Pretty much. I think there simply wasn't time for it. There also wasn't
time to go into the idea that Earth had placed some colonies on worlds
with bronze-age native civilizations. Neither was there time to go into
the history of how Babylon 5 was built. (The man who had created the
Babylon Project appeared in one script that was never made.)

> I also noticed that parts of Babylon 5 (the space station,t hat is) looked
> different in the pilot than in the main series; and, of course, that some of
> the aliens looked disturtbingly like muppets. I'm glad they have up on the
> animation stuff for them. However, the humans also look less diverse in the
> main show, and I find that a bit sad.

There was an entire year between the making of the pilot and the making
of the series, during which most of the long-term contracts lapsed. The
makeup and costume people were all replaced. Because of the interval of
a year, and because the new makeup and costume people didn't want to
spend five years recreating other peoples' designs, everything was
reworked. Also, in the original script, Delenn was a male. He would have
changed to a female at the same time as all of Delenn's other changes.
But it was decided after filming the pilot that it wasn't working, so
the word "he" was changed to "she" on the soundtrack, and, when the
series was filmed, Delenn's makeup was changed to look more feminine.

Other changes were made. Johnny Sekka's health failed, so Dr. Kyle was
replaced by Dr. Franklyn. Pat Tallman's agent tried to extort more
money, so Lyta Alexander was replaced by Talia Winters. (Tallman got a
new agent, and eventually, as fate would have it, returned to the
series.) Tamlyn Tomita was insulted by Warner Brothers executives, first
being made to rerecord all her speeches so as to sound more "feminine",
and then being criticized for not sounding military enough, so she left,
and Laurel Takashima was replaced by Susan Ivanova.

--
John W. Kennedy
"Information is light. Information, in itself, about anything, is light."
-- Tom Stoppard. "Night and Day"
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

"Dirk Thierbach" <dthierbach.DeleteThis@usenet.arcornews.de> skrev i meddelandet
news:20080105095754.138D.1.NOFFLE@dthierbach.news.arcor.de...

[snip]

>> Ob Tolkien: I believe one can characterize the relation between the
>> Minbari
>> and the Earthers as to some extent similar to that between Tolkien's
>> Elves
>> and Men.
>
> Yes, and you're not the first to notice. And given the relations between
> Vorlons and Minbari, what does that make the Vorlons? (In this
> context,
> of course).

(GASP) Maiar - who are then told to bugger off.

>> There is even, we learn, the occasional marriage between Minbari
>> and Earther, with tremendous consequences.
>
> It's actually more complicated then you probably yet know...

That sounds promising.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

"Ermanna" <kmsolinas_nospam.DeleteThis@comcast.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:g6adnfLUlYu1auPanZ2dnUVZ_oSnnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Öjevind Lång happily swam across a river of CHOKLIT:
>> I've spent much of the holiday seson watching Babylon 5 on DVD. In
>> Episode 3 of the Second Season, "The Geometry of Shadows", the technomage
>> Elric says: "There is an old saying: 'Do not try the patience of wizards,
>> for they are subtle and quick to anger'." Of course, that is a direct
>> adaption of the proverb quoted by Gildor Inglorion in "Three is Company":
>> "Do not meddle in the affairs of Wizards, for they are subtle and quick
>> to anger". Perhaps this isn't news to others here, but it was to me. It
>> gave me a kick, actually. (The quote is mentioned in the Wikipedia
>> article about technomages, but attritbuted to Gandalf. I'll go change
>> that now.)
>
> My sister bought that a while ago and I've watched some of it with her.
> There is also a reference to the Centauri god Morgoth (who, I believe, is
> the god of the dead and thresholds), a reference to Lennier being in his
> eleventy-something year at some point, and references to dark things
> stretching out their hands (or something similar).

There is a Centauri god called Morgoth? OK, now we know they are bad guys.

Öjevind
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

Öjevind Lång wrote:

> I also noticed ..., of course, that some
> of the aliens looked disturtbingly like muppets. I'm glad they have up on
> the animation stuff for them.

Hey, one of my favorite SF shows was "Farscape", where a number of the
characters (and one of the main ones) not only looked like but _were_
muppets.
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

Derek Broughton wrote:
>
> Hey, one of my favorite SF shows was "Farscape", where a number of the
> characters (and one of the main ones) not only looked like but _were_
> muppets.

TWO!

Michelle
Flutist
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5 

John W. Kennedy wrote:

> Tamlyn Tomita was insulted by Warner Brothers executives, first
> being made to rerecord all her speeches so as to sound more "feminine",
> and then being criticized for not sounding military enough, so she left,
> and Laurel Takashima was replaced by Susan Ivanova.

.... who did an admirable job of sounding both feminine and military!
--
derek
 >> Stay informed about: Tolkien Quoted in Babylon 5