New review at Aint It Cool News

There is what seems to be a new review of Legend of the Rangers at the Aint It Cool News site.

Legend of the Rangers review

Warning: it has loads of spoilers. And the reviewer doesn't sound too happy with the movie.
I still refuse to succumb to pessimism myself.

------------------
"It's animal magnetism. What can I say?"
- G'Kar, A Tragedy of Telepaths
Visit Kribu's Lounge - now completely ad-free!

Kribu, you must have posted at the same time as me! Actually, I didn't think that there were that many spoilers in the review, as the reviewer doesn't really cover the plot, the previous review was more involved with the plot. I suppose that you could call the greater emphasis on the look and sound of the show in this review spoilers, though. And I'm still looking forward to seeing the movie, whenever we get it on this side of the Atlantic; it's just worth seeing what, if anything, people don't like about a production as well as rave reviews. I'm a bit worried about the polarisation of views so far: cast say it's knockout, but the AICN reviewers seem really unimpressed. I'd like to see a few more independent opinions, and a greater range of views.

But I'll still look forward to it myself, just with more structured expectations.

------------------

Yes, I beat you by three minutes.

No, there weren't too many spoilers as such - but he does elaborate on the enemy a little more than we know from the trailers/interviews so far, for instance.

Yes, it wasn't a nice review. Then again, he says he didn't like Crusade either - and very many people, me included, liked that. So I'm reserving my judgement until I've seen it.

I'm just a tiny little bit worried though.

------------------
"It's animal magnetism. What can I say?"
- G'Kar, A Tragedy of Telepaths
Visit Kribu's Lounge - now completely ad-free!

I guess we'll find out for ourselves in January...

------------------
"What's up, Drakh?"

Michael Garibaldi

I can copy my opinion from another topic
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR> I've read the review. So, if the half of the points in the review are true, than I have to said: "LOTR is not B5 anymore".
Good bye B5. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------

Well, this reviewer is very very into Star Trek. Now, I know many of my co-workers are both Star Trek and B5 fans, as am I. But I have learned since that there are MANY who just tend to trash each other. (Note Solaris' frustration in some other threads.) So, keep that in mind.

I will give the reviewer this much, though: he can spell and make complete sentences. The last one was pretty sloppy (the last reviewer, I mean).

------------------
"I do not believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense,
reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."-- Galileo

Ain't it Cool News had another review, from a different Trekkie, who liked it (without effects I might add). AICN has been a pretty shitty SciFi site for a long time, their indecision on this is not a surprise. Basically this place is just a bunch of "fanboys", nothing more. I look for ward to the Cinescape and SciFi Wire reviews, those I will believe, AICN I truly think has stunk for years now, with no hope of ever making sense.


------------------

Pardon my French, but critics can all go fuck themselves.

Am I the only who read tons of negative press for B5? Original Trek got slammed when it came out, too. Until the Simpsons achieved mass popularity, it wasn't recognized by most press for its wit and clever writing.

And don't even get me started on music critics. You should see all the bad press John Coltrane got.

Reviewers get flooded with stuff to watch, so they look at everything very superficially. Much of the time, their main concern is to predict whether or not the thing they are reviewing will be popular, so that they can be shown to have been right. Since Rangers will appeal to a small niche market, there is no reason for a reviewer to really look at the thing.

And there's the silly Trek vs B5 thing someone mentioned above. Of course this reviewer has to jump into the Trek comparisons, which is silly. Anybody with that small of a reference viewpoint loses credibility with me.

The really dumb thing in that review was the LOTR= Legend of the Rangers and Lord of the Rings. So, what, no one's supposed to use those letters now? Wtf?

Then he goes into how "cliche" the characters are. The B5 characters were cliche too, until the story propelled them forward. This is how JMS works: he takes the familiar, then, in the course of time, he flips it on its ass. Sure, this takes a bit of patience from the audience, but the reward is much more than sitting through 7 years of a Trek series to come out with nothing in the end (sorry, but Picard playing cards with the crew isn't nearly as big a character change as Londo sitting on the throne alone with a Keeper).

And lots of complaints about the FX. Well, sorry Mr Hot Shot Critic, but Rangers didn't have the $67 gazillion budget that Trek did, but I guess Truth has no place in your world, does it?

If the critic knew anything about B5, he would know that the characters and FX would only improve if it would go to series. This movie acts as a starting point, not a complete picture.

Screw him and the horse he rode in on, and don't let these bastard critics tell you what to watch, read, and enjoy. If I did that, I wouldn't be listening to half the music I listen to and be stuck reading Michael Crichton books.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."

Well, the second review really doesn't give much away, so I decided to go and read it (if it got too spoilerish, of course, I'd not finish... but it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know about Sarah's job, or the aliens, etc...)

I really got pissed at the Trek comparisons. Not because the reviewer was placing B5LR in comparison to Trek (again) - can't he just take B5LR as it is: it's own creative work inspired by a certain universe but certainly not in keeping with the series that spawned it? Yeesh.

For me, he kvetched a lot more about the computer graphics than he did the story and the characters. And one thing that pissed me off about the status of the characters in relationship to one another -

<table bgcolor=black><tr><td bgcolor=black><font size=1 color=white>Spoiler:</font></td></tr><tr><td><font size=2 color=black> The thing he said about the "relationshipper" possibility between David and Sarah. </font></td></tr></table>

Well.. of COURSE. DUH. It's good storytelling to have an element like that in the story... why do you think it's used over and over again? And also - I'm putting this in a spoiler box because it would spoil the above by context:

<table bgcolor=black><tr><td bgcolor=black><font size=1 color=white>Spoiler:</font></td></tr><tr><td><font size=2 color=black> Sheridan and Ivanova never jumped into a relationship. Ever. Yes, men and women can be friends. Just because David and Sarah are of the opposite sex and good friends.. does not mean they'll end up as 'shipper chow! Especially if one's a commanding officer! </font></td></tr></table>

I'm still reserving judgement, because this guy was obviously more concerned with the testosterone than the story.

------------------
Ranger Channe, the next JMS, who walks in the dark places no one may enter, lives for the One, and dies for the chocolate cheesecake.

[This message has been edited by channe (edited October 16, 2001).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by channe:
I really got pissed at the Trek comparisons. Not because the reviewer was placing B5LR in comparison to Trek (again) - can't he just take B5LR as it is: it's own creative work inspired by a certain universe but certainly not in keeping with the series that spawned it? Yeesh.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed.
Hopefully, a B5 fan will review it soon. Why are all the Trek fans getting them? it makes no sense. lol

------------------
No one here is exactly what he appears.
G'Kar - Andreas Katsulas

Nothing's the same anymore.
Commander Sinclair - Michael O'Hare

Babylon 5

channe-


<table bgcolor=black><tr><td bgcolor=black><font size=1 color=white>Spoiler:</font></td></tr><tr><td><font size=2 color=black>He was talking about David and Dulann, not David and Sarah. Sarah may be featured more in the trailer, but Dulannn is the first officer and secondary lead. </font></td></tr></table>




------------------

There was a guy who used to be at AICN, & he was a B5 fan. Ever since he left, the place has become a Trek-worshipper's paradise. I am taking this review with a grain of salt (& I hope the B5LR actors do, too, if they happen to see it). I'm waiting for the reviews in places like my local newspaper.

Tammy

------------------

"We're in here! Can anyone hear us?"
"I hear you." [giggle, laugh]
"In here!"
"We are here." [giggle, laugh]
-- Londo and G'Kar in Babylon 5:"Convictions"

Tammy's Station
http://community.webtv.net/gkarfan/TammysStation

Ehhh. Phil does not listen to these "reviewers". They all suck balls. Phil can decide what is good all by himself.

------------------
"Forget about the reasons and
The treasons we are seeking
Forget about the notion that
Our emotions can be swept away
Forget about being guilty,
We are innocent instead
For soon we will all find our lives swept away"
-Dave Mathews Band
"Seek up"

Ain't It Cool: Review on "Babylon 5:The Legend of the Rangers"...

Well...I tried and tried, with great effort, to restrain myself from posting a reactionary reponse with regards to the recent review of "To Live and Die in Starlight" @ Ain't It Cool website...but, as you can all see, my efforts were futile...

Although I'm posting, I will keep it simply brief...

I had a nice chuckle while reading the review, asking myself...Geez, this particuliar individual definitely didn't view the movie that I saw...

On a realistic level, I understand and accept the fact that there will be some individuals that will not like the show, and will lean towards a negative, critical tone...But this review is ridiculous...

There is constructive criticism...and then there is criticism for the fact of criticism...it's motivation coming from a personal level of resentment...bitterness...etc. (not sure why that is?)

I really don't care to get analytical on what exactly this particuliar critic stated in his review...

But, all that is said can pretty much be taken with a grain of salt...actually, one can go complete opposite with the negative opinions stated...Although, this is only my opinion too...ha ha ha...

Anyways...the review was quite interesting to me...and I appologize for not getting detailed, but, I really think that It would serve no purpose...

I look forward for everyone to see "To Live and Die in Starlight! Even more than ever now!!!

Cheers! -Warren T. Takeuchi- "Kit"




------------------

Good for you, Warren. Actors are notoriously sensitive to criticism, so it's nice to see someone have this much confidence in his and his colleagues' work.

If there's one thing the actors visiting these sites have learned, it's that there is an eager audience out there anticipating this performance, despite any reviews, criticism, or other such foolishness.

------------------
"You do not make history. You can only hope to survive it."

Woah!!!!!

Just read the review, it does seem totally biased and one sided. Actually dop the does seem and insert IS.

I pay little heed to the likes of critics and so called "knowledgable ones". They assume because they are paid to evaluate subject matter, they are better at it than anyone else duh no, anyone can have an opinion once they have been out and seen the subject matter for themselves. I like Star Trek and Babylon 5, but I prefer the B5 universe, no malice in it just my choice.

I like most sci-fi actually, and it's never at the expense of resenting another. How petty how small minded.

The best thing anyone can do is ignore this kind of propaganda. Watch it for themselves, if they fail to be impressed then fair do's no-one can complain. I hate sycophants, you either follow by choice or not at all to just drift along aimlessly, forever directed by other peoples motivation without question is a miserable lot in life.

As for the reviewer, there is an old saying:

Those people who think they know everything merely annoy those of us who do.

B5'ers KNOW what they like and they have the independence of thought to make up their own minds.

People like this reviewer are like the Ikaaran bio-weapon or the Hyach, in short they are purists. They seek out all that is not identical to their own and obliterate, but as B5 points out it is to their own detriment. If every other sci-fi programme was gunned down to make way for Trek, what a small universe we would be left with. Eventually the whole sci-fi market would stagnate and break down. It will never happen of course, but these people must be stopped as they are damaging the WHOLE GENRE!

I personally think that B5LR will do well eventually, because it seems from press release to be integrating more martial arts and stuff, which is going through a renaissance at present. Sci Fi and martial arts go well together if done well... I'm alluding to the Matrix here.

So Sci-Fi
Martial Arts
Clever Writer

Winning Formula

By the way the reviewer shot themselves in the foot.

By describing a character as a babe, you automatically add at least a million young hot blooded 18-25 year old males onto the viewing figures.

This is what I call "Resident Babe Theory"

Most sci fi shows that have resorted to that tactic survive. JMS has an ACE up his sleeve here though... he can pick babes that can act too!

------------------
"We Live for the One. We die for the One!"

Come on, folks, who do you trust - the navigator of the Liandra or some Trek fanboy who doesn't know his Shadows from his Vorlons?

I'll reserve my judgement, as well - except for the judgement against reviewers with *too much* of a bias. A good reviewer is biased. A bad reviewer is fanatical.

And, folks - about the thing I posted above -

<table bgcolor=black><tr><td bgcolor=black><font size=1 color=white>Spoiler:</font></td></tr><tr><td><font size=2 color=black> Ok, ok, David and Dulann, my bad. Sorry! But, unless David's playing on his own team, I *know* Sarah and David are going to end up 'shipper chow, no matter if they do get involved or if they don't get involved on the show itself. </font></td></tr></table>

Either way we're gonna have a lot of fun. With or without dumb fanboy reviewers.

------------------
Ranger Channe, the next JMS, who walks in the dark places no one may enter, lives for the One, and dies for the chocolate cheesecake.

Heh so OK my wording was a little strong!

Their only bias should be towards objectivity though, and to fair play.

My terming of the word bias seems to fit your fanaticist!

I don't like people playing dirty. Honour and respect in rivalry is vital!

That's why I'm angry!

------------------
"We Live for the One. We die for the One!"

By the way has my picture vanished in the last couple of posts... it seems to have???

------------------
"We Live for the One. We die for the One!"

Damn that Captain Pike! He belongs in a cage!



Keep your chins up guys. You know there are people who hated "In the Beginning?"




------------------
"When something we value is destroyed, we rebuild it. If it's destroyed again we rebuild it again. And again, and again, and again. Until it stays. "
~Jeffrey Sinclair