• 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.

Why so much B5 hostility?

Dekion

Regular
I am asking this because I frequent many boards, for many shows. The only Trek board I go to is at 3dgladiators, and they are quite hostile about B5. Some other places also dislike it, or even attack you if you mention it. Have you encountered the same thing, and is there anything we can do to stop it? Since we generally behave in a mature manner, having little to no posts called "Trek Sux", I just thought maybe others could be too. Maybe it is because I am not in their shoes, and if anyone here knows who some are like this I would love to know.


------------------
 
I think it's not just a B5 thing, I think people attack any show that they don't understand. Or just flame it for the sake of it. I've seen absolute wars start out of Voyager flaming. I imagine it's the same for every show everywhere. Whereas you have the people that love the show, you'll get some people who hate it... either through valid reasons, or just because they want to!


------------------
station.jpg
<font size="-2" color="silver">"The Babylon Project was our last, best, hope for peace.
A self-contained world five miles long, located in neutral
territory. A place of commerce and diplomacy for a quarter
of a million humans and aliens. A shining beacon in space,
all alone in the night. It was the dawn of the third age of
mankind, the year the great war came upon us all. This is
the story of the last of the Babylon stations. The year is
2259: the name of the place is Babylon 5."
 
Maybe it is just this board I mentioned, but the percentage of "I hate" posts is HUGE, and it is all B5. Maybe it is because the moderator hates B5.


------------------
 
My personal opinion is that there are a lot of people around with a kind of unfocussed hatred. I saw a neighbor of mine flip out totally over a very minor incident. And there are so many KIDS with this anger, not really at anything specific. Little stuff makes a safer target.

------------------
 
There was a lot of B5 hatred in the early years mainly by Trek fans. A lot of it had to do with DS9 comparisons. I thought it had long since died out. If it has restarted it may be because there is going to be a new B5 movie.

If I come across a Board like that I just unsubscribe. You can't argue with them.

------------------
 
I've never understood the hostility towards B5. Maybe it's because JMS dared to say in the early days of B5 that there should be more to SF-TV than Star Trek. Also, B5 was really challenging Trek there for awhile, in terms of popularity (& could again if Rangers becomes a series). I feel that some Trekkers felt threatened by that.

Tammy

------------------
 
All I'm gonna say is this...hate B5 if you will..but 20 years from now ask general scifi fans what the better show was and I think you'll find B5 will be their answer.

------------------
"I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I'd look up at your lifeless eyes and wave like this. Can you and your associates arrange it for me, Mr. Morden?"
Vir - In The Shadow of Z' HA Dum
 
Well, I feel a need to respond to this posting. I have to say that "Babylon 5" is a very intelligent and complicating televison series that only appeals to a certain minority of viewers opposed to the "Star Trek" saga, which is more mainstream and simple...or, I should say, that is how "Star Trek" has become...The majority of tv viewers (the average working stiff) wants simple viewing where "THINKING" is not a desireable activity! Escapism so to speak...It doesn't take a "Nuclear (Rocket Scientist) to enjoy the Star Trek series...but, it may take one to really appreciate the 'Babylon 5' series! I am sure that when Gene Rodenberry (spelling?) created the 'Star Trek' series, he definitely (in my opinion), wasn't thinking on the lines of mainstream, simplistic so to speak, presentations! Firstly, anyone that enters the world of science fiction has to have an above average, to very high intelligence and creativity...individuals that have created these shows normally come from backgrounds that specialize in areas of science...etc...Think how far ahead Gene was when he created "Star Trek" (in terms of the time relative to the present)...The same goes for JMS and the brilliant 'Babylon 5'...everything seems very believable in the world of "Babylon 5"...there are experts in the field of science that have been advisors to create the realism and believablity for the show! To make a long story short..."Baylon 5" is a very intelligent, complicated series...and JMS kept it that way...Unfortunately, the majority of the viewers are simple people...it is obvious when you see the blockbusters at theaters...mindless celluoid! I am sure you understand what I am trying to say in my primitive explanation...I am by no means a rocket scientist...but I appreciate "Babylon 5" just for the facts mentioned above...
 
Though I like B5, here are what a lot of my people that I know say:

"The whole series was framed around the shadow war and it ended abruptly and there was no where else for the series to go after that."

"The last season sucked"

"Nothing is revealed .... i.e. what happened to G'Kar up until he kills Londo; what happens to Londo up until he kills G'Kar; what about Lyta; what about the telepath war; why the hell did we never see David... etc."

"If you want to find out how the major players turn out you have to buy a friggin' trilogy of books... screw that!"

"The Vorlons (i.e. Kosh) disappeared completely after the third season... he was my favortite freakin' character!"

"It seems too much like Lord of the Rings in outer space."

"Countless episodes with little to no action"

"At the time, DS9 was a more exiciting show to watch."

"Little to no re-cap ... if I happen to miss a single show, them I'm screwed later on."

------------------
 
POT
although most of those replies are subjective, the "no recap" thing is VERY valid. I think if they had done something like Earth Final Conflict does at the beginning of each episode then it would have helped that one.


------------------
 
Most B5 fans are Trek fans - almost everyone enjoyed at least one of the show's incarnations, and it has hardly been possible to grow up in the industrialized world in the last 30 years without some exposure to the show.

Most Trek fans are not B5 fans - in fact a good number of them aren't even science fiction fans - they are just Star Trek fans. They view any non-Trek space show as a threat, an implied criticism, or a rip-off of their beloved show. (Sometimes to the point of absurdity. I've seen a usenet post claiming that "Soul Hunter" ripped-off Star Trek III - as if the concept of "the soul" were (tm) Paramount Pictures Corp. Another complained about the "unrealistic" back-of-hand communicators because "everybody knows" that in the future we'll be using little chest-mounted pins to talk to one another.)

Fueling the inter-show venom was the fact that many of the Trek converts to B5 had become critical of the direction "the franchise" was taking (usually they became critical before ever seeing B5) and later held up B5 as a model of the kind of show that Trek could be and should be. That was heresy in the eyes of many Trek fans, and they responded by attacking the "false god."

Re: non-fan critiques of the show:

The series wasn't about the Shadow War, any more than The Lord of the Rings was about the War of the Ring. Both were about the events leading up to their respective wars, the events flowing from them, and the effect they had on the characters. People who complain that the show was over after the Shadow War simply didn't understand what they were watching.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>"Dear Mr. Tolkien:

I just wanted to say that I think the way you ended THE LORD OF THE RINGS was crap. You didn't provide any closure. Instead of spending time with the hobbits clearing out the shire (come on, urban renwal in LoTR? give me a break) and lots of goodbyes, you SHOULD have shown me what happened to Tom Bombadil, he was an important part of the story, and you just left his story thread there unresolved.

You made a big deal out of the elves going to the west, but we never SAW it! We never found out what was there, or what Bilbo found when he got there, or what happened to the dwarves, or what happened to Merry and Pippin....

You betrayed your audience by not resolving every single plot thread you introduced in your book, and as a result, it is never going to be of value to anyone, ever, and will never go past its first printing."


You have to really decide *Who is the story about?* You can really only track a couple of characters to the end...here we tracked a number there or nearly there. This story is a history -- told from a future perspective -- about the events of the Babylon station, and those who passed through it, during a specific period in its history. - JMS<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"If you want to find out how the major players turn out you have to buy a friggin' trilogy of books... screw that!"

No you don't. With the exception of Lyta & Lennier - and their fates aren't revealed in the novels - all you have to do is pay attention to the show.

Londo and G'Kar die as shown several times. So what if we don't know every detail that led up to the final moment. Vir is Emperor, the Centauri are free, the Drakh are gone. Lennier is dead by the time of "SiL". David Sheridan (who isn't a character, he's a name we hear a couple of times, and his lifespan falls outside the main body of the plot) is in Ranger training, obviously Keeper-free.

That we may be curious about details never shown doesn't mean that these things had to be in the story. I might be curious about how Kirk and Spock first met, how McCoy joined the crew, how Starfleet and the Federation were formed in the first place. Does Star Trek "suck" because these things are never shown?

Hell, we don't see the deaths of Garibaldi, Franklin or Ivanova, either. In a way a "future history" really doesn't have an end-point, any more than real history does. There are always people still alive to carry on the story. In both fictional and real history the writer chooses a story to tell about those events, selects which incidents to illuminate and which to pass over briefly, and arranges them in a coherent order with an apparent beginning, middle, and end - but these are all somewhat arbitrary.

Do you start a history of the American Civil War with Fort Sumter and end with Appomattox? Or do you start with "bleeding Kanasas", or even the Constitutional convention (where the slavery issue was swept under the carpet in the interest of getting the new nation started) and carry through to Reconstruction? Which characters do you follow through the War? Lincoln? Grant? Lee? From which city do you view the War, Washington or Richmond? Or both?

JMS broadly outlined the history of his universe from several million years in the past to about a million years in the future. He outlined it in greater detail for 1,000 years on either side of the B5 arc. Within that history he picked the story he wanted to tell, the characters he wanted to write about and the incidents that he would use to tell it.

Regards,

Joe

------------------
Joseph DeMartino
Sigh Corps
Pat Tallman Division

joseph-demartino@att.net
 
I never stated that THEIR dislikes weren't subjective ... most people's dislikes are. Whenever they tell me that they don't like B5 I simply shrug my shoulders. It's not like its possible to talk someone into "liking" something that they just don't like. I mean if someone thinks that the entire series was built on the shadow war, or that nothing was resolved, or that there were a lot of boring episodes ... so what? It certainly doesn't affect how I see B5.

------------------
 
POT
I meant no offense. As always, that last post brought up a good point. Why should I care what others think? I knew this already, but my morbid curiosity gets the best of me sometimes.



------------------
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Babylon 5: Intelligence:
Well, I feel a need to respond to this posting. I have to say that "Babylon 5" is a very intelligent and complicating televison series that only appeals to a certain minority of viewers opposed to the "Star Trek" saga, which is more mainstream and simple...or, I should say, that is how "Star Trek" has become...The majority of tv viewers (the average working stiff) wants simple viewing where "THINKING" is not a desireable activity! Escapism so to speak...It doesn't take a "Nuclear (Rocket Scientist) to enjoy the Star Trek series...but, it may take one to really appreciate the 'Babylon 5' series! I am sure that when Gene Rodenberry (spelling?) created the 'Star Trek' series, he definitely (in my opinion), wasn't thinking on the lines of mainstream, simplistic so to speak, presentations! Firstly, anyone that enters the world of science fiction has to have an above average, to very high intelligence and creativity...individuals that have created these shows normally come from backgrounds that specialize in areas of science...etc...Think how far ahead Gene was when he created "Star Trek" (in terms of the time relative to the present)...The same goes for JMS and the brilliant 'Babylon 5'...everything seems very believable in the world of "Babylon 5"...there are experts in the field of science that have been advisors to create the realism and believablity for the show! To make a long story short..."Baylon 5" is a very intelligent, complicated series...and JMS kept it that way...Unfortunately, the majority of the viewers are simple people...it is obvious when you see the blockbusters at theaters...mindless celluoid! I am sure you understand what I am trying to say in my primitive explanation...I am by no means a rocket scientist...but I appreciate "Babylon 5" just for the facts mentioned above...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hummmmm, very nice to know that by your standards, myself a Star Trek fan is not intelligent enough to be a Babylon 5 fan.

I have an over 200 IQ. By the world's standard, I am considered extremely intelligent. I do not compare these two shows. They are different. One was born, created, and produced in the 60's. The other was at least produced in the 1990's. This is apples and oranges guys, two different fruits. But one can like both without trashing the other.

And, mmmmmmmmmm . . . how does one says this:

ok, here goes -- The day B5 reaches the longetivity that Star Trek created, it can claim a piece of that pie. B5 is not thirty some odd years old. Not yet.

Gene Roddenberry was a trailblazer and built the roads in which people like JMS could walk and make their own roads from there.

Stop knocking trek, it was the first, it is the original, and by many standards, because of its simplicity, still the best.

B5 is its own universe, and doesn't need to tread on Trek. It is brilliant, intelligent, and a very engrossing show.

Isn't that enough?



------------------
Colleen L. Stanford
Gideon's Mine, all Mine
(he just doesn't know it yet, LOL)
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gkarfan:
I've never understood the hostility towards B5. Maybe it's because JMS dared to say in the early days of B5 that there should be more to SF-TV than Star Trek. Also, B5 was really challenging Trek there for awhile, in terms of popularity (& could again if Rangers becomes a series). I feel that some Trekkers felt threatened by that.

Tammy
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not likely little one.

Star Trek has been around since 1966, count it -- 1966, which is the original air date of the very first Star Trek episode.

Can you say the same for B5? Not yet. We are not threatened by B5 at all. We enjoy it too. But every B5 fan I have met starts out by saying they are better, more intelligent, better ships, etc. There is no comparison here, technology changes by the decade, imagination grows, and yes JMS is right, Sci Fi needs to grow and encompass more. Its books do, so why not its TV shows? The problem is that we knock the other shows and not praise them for what they were.

Without Star Trek I doubt B5 would have come about so easily. Why not just give credit where credit is due. We were the first, we are the original, and thanks to our existence, others sprang from the well.

Now that I have deleted the totally flaming, really off the wall for me (but I am tired of being beat up for being a Star Trek fan from a bunch of wussies), I can now post this.

There is plenty of room out here for all of us sci fi fans. it's a big univ-ee-verse



------------------
Colleen L. Stanford
Gideon's Mine, all Mine
(he just doesn't know it yet, LOL)
 
No offense taken Dekion. I actually go over to the TrekToday sita a lot and those guys seem to hate B5 almost as much as Voyager-- which I didn't think was possible.

But to be honest, I think I've always known that B5 was an acquired taste. Some people will simply not like it. Some people will hate it automatically because it is not Star Trek or Star Wars and some will hate it because they have the attention span of gnats. And then some might dislike it because they simply don't like the story arc... etc. Or because they thought it should have gone another way....

To me its weird that my friends and I can like so many similar things -- especially when it comes to Sci-fi-- but disagree so passionately on B5... like I said, its an acquired taste.

------------------
 
Thank you for the honest response. I have nothing but respect for Classic Trek, which is a great show. I think B5 is better, but Classic Trek is a close second. I have not bashed Trek, unless it was to complain about Voyager, which is just plain bad IMHO. It is true that without Trek there would be no B5, no argument there. But saying that B5 does not belong in the same league as Trek is presumptous. The day B5 won its first HUGO that changed. The oldest is not always the best. Monarchy is not "better" than democracy, yet monarchy is a far older system of government. You are right about the apples and oranges thing. I too am a Trek fan, and Classic Trek (and to a lesser degree TNG and DS9) have made an indellible mark on me. That is not to say anything bad on either show. I have yet to see a B5 post bash Trek. Have you? Where? Is it as frequent as on the Trek boards?


------------------
 
Hisssssssssssssssssssss, Babylon Intelligence the poison person from California, I will match my intelligence against yours any time, any day. I am 42, born in Hawaii, raised in Norfolk, VA. My father was a Navy man. My parents were separated when I was six, divorced six years later (hey my dad was a carbon copy of Clinton what can I say). I have a 240 IQ, had numerous science awards when I was in school, spelling bee champion six years in a row in my state, am an executive patent law secretary now and I can type 140 words per minute.

Am awaiting to be a contestant on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire", have been a sci fi fan all my life, have watched them all, like elements in pretty much about all of them and have never wasted time comparing them, they are supposed to be different.

I write poetry, have been published. I do text manuals in my spare time for the Goddard Space Center. Would love to visit Cape Canaveral (just because I love the name). Have never once thought we were the only planet in the entire universe with life on it, although I don't discount God either. I fail to see why you cannot have faith and believe in life in the universe. Faith and religion are two different things.

I used to read avidly, now I only read for entertainment or knowledge, depending on the mood I am in at that time. I have little spare time and I prefer to be entertained in the little that I have.

I love music, almost everything, I draw the line on rap.

I prefer sci fi shows, although I still can't quite get into First Wave and Farscape is wearing a bit thin when they killed off the blue chick. Black Scorpion (yikes)? And if they killed off a bit of the "bad government" and the so-called "witty" repartee and turned it into a show the Invisible Man may go back on my "must watch" list. Right now its teetering. I watch Andromeda (it makes me laugh and the Tyr and Dylan are worth looking at), any Star Trek original eps (I own them all), DS9 I don't mind, I lost interest in Voyager midway through season 2, and even when 7 of 9 joined the cast, it worked well for a while, then got stale again), any ep of b5, any b5 movie (even the first one which is not my favorite), and any and all TNT bullet holed eps of Crusade.

Care to take me on you overgrown bag of hot air?

------------------
Colleen L. Stanford
Gideon's Mine, all Mine
(he just doesn't know it yet, LOL)
 
What confuses me is not the people who have seen b5 and have complaints, things they would have like to have seen done differently, but those who attack it automatically out of hand. Some scifi fans treat anyone who mentions b5 like a recuiter from NAMBLA.

As for Rodenberry, he may have blazed a path for others to follow but Paramount was always close behind using a scorched earth policy to prevent it from happening.

I prefer b5 but still like ToS, DS9, and TNG. More complex is probably a better description than more intelligent and it says little about the fan. After all I'm intelligent enough to understand the nuances of b5 but I watch the WWF as well.

------------------
Bus
"Welcom futurists, cyberphiles, and the rest of you dateless wonders..."-Mayor Quimby
 
It's because they are jealous that B5 was better....
Although I like TOST and ST TNG, nothing from them has compared to B5 since....
B5 was how they wanted their show to be....

------------------
"Faith Manages"
 

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top