• The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.

B5:TLT, Success or Failure

B5:TLT, Success or Failure

  • TLT was excellent overall, will definitely Buy again

    Votes: 10 24.4%

  • TLT was ok overall for the budget constraints

    Votes: 20 48.8%

  • TLT was a failure, if there are more i wont buy it

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Over Here let the DVD down

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • Over There let the DVD down

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Despite Story issues, i want more B5 so will buy more

    Votes: 10 24.4%
  • Total voters
    41
fisheggs said:
...or to expand the B5 universe in a significant way.... it's a small start....
Click to expand...

Did you know going into TLT that it was, from the beginning, going to be small, intimate, character stories?
 
Certainly.:D My"gripe" is mostly about the Lochley tale. I didn't hate it, but wasn't captivated by it either. I would have preferred a story about her involvement during Clark's reign, fleshing out her character more. This particular tale might have been better on a later release but IMHO didn't expand her character in any way or give any new insights into the B5 universe, not what I was hoping for to restart the franchise.
 
Did you know that the Lochley tale is a reworking of a short story JMS wrote years ago? It probably expalins why it feels so 'odd'.

We don't know exactly what restrictions JMS was working under. Certainly the budget dictated pretty self contained stories for this first outing. There is more CGI on the second tale, and I bet JMS had to choose one or the other, so a prisoner in a cell story makes sense.

I enjoyed having more B5 again. I'm still trying to figure out why the entity needed to be exorcised, unless the guy he was in was a devout catholic and the exorsism was needed to make the host body expel the entity itself.

I like the character of the Prince Regent. I hope we see him again sometime.
 
Elenopa said:
Certainly the budget dictated pretty self contained stories for this first outing.
Click to expand...

I have seen this said quite a few times, but my understanding was that it was JMS who dictated self contained stories ... not just for this disc but for the whole project. An anthology show, telling small stories focussed mainly on a single character, is always going to be that, no matter how much the fans might wish it were otherwise.
 
Ok folks, I just let of some steam over at JMS news on this. It became such a good rant that I thought I would share it with you all as well, because I love you all so much ;)

(Apologies to folk who lurk at both sites)

Anyway, here goes...

Anyhow, to argue ceaselessly over minutiae such as this is to totally miss the point of the story, and indeed most stories in general. It was all about reading between the lines and spotting someone's true motivation, a necessary skill for any commander and a re-occurring theme in B5. It really matters not if Azomdeus were a genuine supernatural being (which I personally think would be very off the wall and cool) or an alien / latent super-telepath or Oberon King of the Faeries up to his old tricks again.

It was how the characters spotted the problem and dealt with it. And that, for me, (and my usually sci-fi hating girlfriend) was a good solid thought provoking piece of entertainment.

You know, JMS has tried to do something different here, take a universe we all love and explore smaller facets of it through characters. He also did it on a tiny budget. Despite this, complaints seem limited to:

(WARNING - the following rant is directed to no-one in particular, just a few generic folk who have in my opinion totally missed the point regarding TLT and what is was designed for)

1) "Demons / Angels have no place in a sci-fi universe. I know this, I'm agnostic/ atheist / materialist and I've worked out the physics for how all the ships work or somesuch. I thought B5 was there to confirm my secular 'science is always right' view of the world and make me feel safe"

- Its not YOUR universe, its JMS's. He can do what he likes. And he does, not what he thinks his fans will like / dislike or what the studio's demographics exec tell him he should. That takes Balls. Big ones. The kind of Balls that get him big Hollywood contracts, whereas most sci-fi TV writers just recycle the same 7 plots over and over again (see half of TNG, all other post DS9 Trek, and ALL of Stargate). He challenged your idea of what science fiction was and took you out of the genre comfort zone. Sorry if you did not like that feeling. He also frequently touched upon the spiritual in the original series, one of its many strengths. Did you really think you could use Kosh to explain every vision every character ever had ? This is still a work of fiction. It makes a point through a STORY.

2) "This makes a mockery of the whole Vorlon storyline"
- Nonsense. They were pretending to be Angels, simply manipulating events. Which came first, chicken or the egg ?

3) "That regent character was nasty, I did not like him. Sheridan should have shot him."
- You were not supposed to. This was done to indicate how Sheridan (and Galen) both prefer peaceful solutions where possible, even if down the line it will cause problems.

4) "I did not see the Zocalo / C+C / Lyta's ass - I loved seeing that in the old show, that for me was B5. Therefore, this was not B5"
- Yes me to, but none of them were vital to the plot of either story. They were also costly (especially the latter). You knew this already when you read about how it was made. So what did you expect ?

5) "There was not enough big space battles in B5. I love space battles, why were there no space battles in TLT. No space battles = TLT != B5"
- See the answer to the above. Anyhow, you got one anyway, and some first rate CGI. So shut up.

6) "The acting / directing was not up to standard"
- It was just as good, if not better than the previous series. Tracy Scroggins was first rate. This was JMS's 2nd major directing gig. Given the budget, he did well enough, although it did feel abit student filmy at times.

7) "He did not tie up X number of plot lines left over from S5 / Crusade / Rangers. I want closure"
- So do I. But in real life we rarely get it. Do you honestly want a final episode where all the characters suddenly have nothing to do ? Again, if you were expecting this from two mini episodes, then you A) missed the point, and B) would have been gutted if he had honestly used a 20 minute episode to sum up all the remaining plot threads from Crusade.

TLT had a limited remit in what it set out to do. In my opinion, (as is all the above), it stated that remit early on (see all of JMS's early posts on this site about it being about small character focused episodes) and achieved it admirably. Many people have made the classic mistake of reviewing something based upon what they wanted to see in it, not what actually happened.
Click to expand...

http://jmsnews.com/forums/showthread.php?p=41839#post41839
 
Last edited:
Your post reminds me of something similar that I almost posted *before* TLT came out. Some of the complaints were easily foreseeable. One question, though. I don't understand the context/definition of the word 'remit' in "TLT had a limited remit in what it set out to do. In my opinion, (as is all the above), it stated that remit early on ". The only way I can make it work is if I substitute 'remit' with 'mandate' or 'mission'. Can you clarify?

Jan
 
darth_librarian said:
4) "I did not see the Zocalo / C+C / Lyta's ass - I loved seeing that in the old show, that for me was B5. Therefore, this was not B5"
- Yes me to, but none of them were vital to the plot of either story. They were also costly (especially the latter).
Click to expand...

Make that Lyta's top. It's priceless. :D
 
<-- Picture of Lyta's top.

Pat Tallman
I I I
VVV
200px-Patricia_Tallman_ComicCon.JPG
 
Jan said:
One question, though. I don't understand the context/definition of the word 'remit' in "TLT had a limited remit in what it set out to do. In my opinion, (as is all the above), it stated that remit early on ". The only way I can make it work is if I substitute 'remit' with 'mandate' or 'mission'. Can you clarify?
Click to expand...

Jan, as a noun, a "remit" is the task or area of activity officially assigned to an individual or organization; the topic that a person, committee, or piece of research is expected to deal with or has authority to deal with, as in, "they set up a group with a remit to suggest ways for strengthening family life."

So, "mandate" or "mission" is close enough.

Amy
 
Truthfully, the whole kit & kaboodle is priceless.

Lyta_s4.jpg


Yes, I had her write that stuff. :eek:

KoshN - Member of Sigh Corps.
 
Jan said:
Your post reminds me of something similar that I almost posted *before* TLT came out. Some of the complaints were easily foreseeable. One question, though. I don't understand the context/definition of the word 'remit' in "TLT had a limited remit in what it set out to do. In my opinion, (as is all the above), it stated that remit early on ". The only way I can make it work is if I substitute 'remit' with 'mandate' or 'mission'. Can you clarify?

Jan
Click to expand...

What Amy said. It's scope or brief would also do, but remit seemed to pop into my head first. It was probably not the best fit.
 
darth_librarian said:
What Amy said. It's scope or brief would also do, but remit seemed to pop into my head first. It was probably not the best fit.
Click to expand...
Nah, I'm glad to add a definition to my vocabulary, thanks both. Thing is, I'm abookkeeper so I automatically think of that word as 'sending money' :eek:

Jan
 
darth_librarian said:
Good for you!

In truth, I would place any part of her in high regard.
Click to expand...

Spleen?

Nah, I'm glad to add a definition to my vocabulary, thanks both. Thing is, I'm abookkeeper so I automatically think of that word as 'sending money' :eek:
Click to expand...

As I seem to be in the habit of making random posts at present, I think I'm right in saying that bookkeeper is the only word in the English language with three sets of double letters joined together.
 
Jan said:
Nah, I'm glad to add a definition to my vocabulary, thanks both. Thing is, I'm abookkeeper so I automatically think of that word as 'sending money' :eek:

Jan
Click to expand...

LOL, me too, as I'm also in accounting. Thanks for standing up and askign for the context for those of us in the same boat as you.
 
Well, in my current library of employment, we seem to use the phrase 'charge' to mean loan, or at least, our US computer system does. I guess I am the other type of book keeper.

Wow, way to derail a thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 420 (members: 1, guests: 419)

Share this page

Back
Top