Slashdot Mirror
Babylon 5 - The Lost Tales Trailer Posted
Space writes "The trailer for the upcoming movie Babylon 5: The Lost Tales — Voices in the Dark has been posted at the official Babylon 5 site. The movie's pre-production was mentioned in a previous discussion. For more on the creation of the film, the CG Society has an ongoing series of articles about the production's effects development."
Someone should send it to Z'ha'dum to die.
After all, using B5 as an example the "Techno Mages" are viewed either as gods, magicians, or freaks, depending on where they are. For what we may construe as purely fantasy may simply be because we don't understand science enough to know what is and what isn't truly possible.
We are an arrogant people who for some reason think we know everything yet laugh at those who came before us for thinking the very same thing
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Quark was the best ;)
Along with the 5 video diaries that you can also find at the official site, an additional video diary with a behind the scenes look at the how the special effects for the production were done is also available at this link.
Among other things you get a longer glimpse at the space battle scene shown in the trailer.
Well put. Dune, for example, had loads of dreams, visions etc but it was science fiction, not fantasy, because it was quite obvious that the human mind had evolved (perhaps thanks to Spice) in the tens of thousands of years since present-day. And frankly, our knowledge of cosmology and what the human brain can do is pretty primitive. For example, is consciousness preserved at the quantum level, thus leading to the possibility that reincarnation is possible? I think not, but I can't prove it -- which makes it excellent 'story material'.
People who think that 21st century science is the be-all and end-all of all knowledge display staggering amounts of hubris, especially since they are familiar with overzealous predictions like "everything that can be patented has been patented" and "there's a world market for maybe 5 computers".
Whether it's overused or not is another question -- that depends on the writer, and I think the B5 seasons treated techno-mages and psychics quite well. Especially compared to a certain Betazoid on TNG, whose sole purpose seemed to be, er, wear dresses and state the obvious.
Go somewhere random
10 years have passed, luckily computer graphics have not advanced in that time, otherwise the movie might loose continuity with the 90's TV show.
I'm also glad I'm able to notice the cheesy CG in an artifact ridden 300 x 400 flash movie. That means it'll be extra cheesy in it's full DVD glory.
Phew.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
You can find a direct link to a mirror of the trailer at this link.
Died of cancer I believe. Before he died I herd he invited all his B5 pals to a big dinner, as a final good bye. Brings a tear to my eye just thinking about it. Terrible way to go.
Most of what you see in B5 is explained along the way in one way or another, some isn't. The future is an interesting place don't you think?
There are many kinds of SciFi that aren't strict, *hard* SciFi. The writer has chosen his path, and it's your choice to stop watching if you find it unbearable.
If you don't find B5 unbearable, then just sit back and enjoy in the knowledge that there are things out there, bigger and more complex than our current understanding of science and the universe.
Out of all SciFi, baring Serenity, B5 is the best. But Technomages, prophets with flashes from the future and even time travel are used as storyline crutches. The whole mystery aspect of B5 is overblown and abused, the show would be much better if it was toned down.
If I want fantasy, I watch fantasy. Just because SciFi can masquerade as fantasy does not change that.
BTW, Dune 2 was horrible SciFi series with the ugliest actors I've ever seen. Especially that woman that was suppose to be "oh so beautiful" that people were taken aback by her beauty. I think they were all shocked by the size of her nose.
Then pat yourself on the back for being ahead of the curve: you're arrogantly scoffing at your contemporaries instead of at people in the past. Ain't progress grand?
I think Clarke's Third Law is fairly well accepted, but you risk abusing it as a catch-all, deux ex machina, "it was just a dream" kind of argument for why fantasy elements are in fact science fiction. It's not a strong argument because what we are really talking about here is art criticism, not whether any event or object in a show is magic.
There is also arrogance where a writer says, "If they accuse me of writing about magic, I'll just point out that it is in fact just sufficiently advanced technology", and then proceeds to write something that is really fantasy in terms of genre.
While we cannot predict what will be possible in the far future, we do know a lot about the world now. The important thing here is that I'm not talking about technology, but rather the many and various forms of literature and movie genres, the history of many religions, tribes and cults, the marketing of corporations, the temptations that even the best writers can fall pray to, etc.
Taking all those factors into account, it seems fair to hold the point of view that Babylon 5 includes fantasy elements (wearing the makeup of Clarke's Third Law), that it is not really trying to be pure sci-fi or speculative fiction. I'm perfectly happy to admit it might all be possible, at the same time as saying that I don't really think that is the point the authors are making.
Yes, it is entirely possible they wanted to play around with the idea of technology-as-magic. But by the time they've thrown in all the rituals, the astral plane metaphors, etc, you have to ask:
Are they still asking, "What if this could be done?", or are they in fact asking, "Wouldn't it be cool if these guys were like wizards, yeah, we'll call them Techno-Mages, you know, play the advanced technology card, etc.. ?" It's an exaggeration, but I suspect that the GP is right, and they are in fact including fantasy in their show.
This is not a bad thing in and of itself; that's a matter of personal taste.
Yes, B5 was my favourite series for a time, even over ST:NG. The continuity of the story made it incredible addictive and increased the deepness of every single main character. I'm not sure it's the best format for a couple of mini spinoffs. Sadly, as far as I know Richard Biggs (Dr Franklin) wasn't the only actor that died after the series: the incredible Andreas Katsulas (G'Kar) passed away some time ago too.
flipping fantastic. looking forward to this.
more information from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voices_in_the_Dark for the lazy amongst us:
Voices in the Dark is the title of the first Lost Tales DVD to be published
Voices in the Dark will be set in 2272. It will feature two linked plotlines viewed separately one after the other but covering the same 72-hour timespan: the first follows ISA President John Sheridan on his way to B5 for a celebration of the 10th Anniversary of the formation of the Interstellar Alliance. During the journey he unexpectedly picks up the Centauri Prince Regent Vintari (third in line to the Centauri Imperial throne) on the edge of Centauri space, and receives a warning from Galen the techno-mage about coming events. The second will feature Colonel (formerly Captain during the series' run) Lochley on B5 awaiting Sheridan's arrival, who summons a priest from Earth space to help deal with a mysterious, seemingly supernatural problem.[14]
Straczynski has stated that predicated on the success of Voices in the Dark a second installment could be released as soon as early 2008.[24] Peter Jurasik has stated that he was contacted by Straczynski to reprise his role as Londo Mollari for a set of alien centric stories after the initial batch centered around humans. He has stated that he said yes to him, "if you [Straczynski] wrote it, I'd do it".[25] The second installment is also set to include a story centered around the character Michael Garibaldi, initially planned for the first installment.[15]
In response to a question about Harlan Ellison writing for the Lost Tales, who acted as conceptual consultant and writer for the original series, Straczynski has stated that he is "sure that down the road I can get Harlan to do something for us". However, for now the studio is pushing for just himself to work on the Lost Tales according to Straczynski, stating they "want this to be you [Straczynski]" because the studio already knows him and likes him.[12]
One of the big events in the Babylon 5 universe that the Lost Tales is set to explore eventually is the Telepath War.[12] Straczynski reportedly stated at the New York Comic-Con in February 2007 that he already has a concept for a possible direct-to-dvd Telepath War story in mind.[24][26]
Straczynski has stated that David Sheridan (John Sheridan and Delenn's son) will both be mentioned in Voices in the Dark, and that he will be seen somewhere else, "in the next DVD"
Okay - here are some spoilers for those who have not read the Technomage trilogy...
.
.
.
The Technomage [book] trilogy which JMS has said is mostly canon, and an unfilmed Crusade script reveals much about the origins of the Technomages. They achieve their "magic" using organic implants provided by the Shadows. The Technomages' technology was originally used by the Shadows to create their ultimate warriors (in the same way that the Vorlons created a few "super weapons" like Lyta).
So it would look like magic to most of us since the First Ones were millions of years more advanced than humans. This is consistent with other things seen in the show - such as the Ikara warrior in the episode "Infection" which mutated a human into a machine. Look closely at the design of the armour and you'll see some Shadow-like material.
Look, "SciFi" just a marketing label designed to make it easy to compartmentalize media in order to maximize synergistic sales. There aren't rules, canons and precepts governed by some international SciFi Body. And there damn well should never be rules like that either. Nothing kills creativity more.
Episodes of Star Trek, for example, could just as easily be classed as romance or murder mystery rather than SciFi. Get over it! And get it into your head that your definition of SciFi, is just that -- yours.
For me, Babylon 5 developed characters and story arcs in a credible and realistic way. People are stupid, weak, selfish and greedy. They believe in things that may not be true. Babylon 5 reflected that, whereas most TV SciFi prior to B5 did not. It asked old and new questions about the nature of belief and existence. And nota bene, that JMS did say online somewhere, that just because the Minbari believe in souls etc does not make it necessarily true.
Which does not mean it is invalid to explore those ideas around a SciFi context.
Leave the labeling and compartmentalization to the marketing drones, or to librarians -- and we all know librarians have something to hide.
And you need no more proof of it than the troubles faced by successor projects. Hell, Season 5 was a mess because of the uncertainty of cancellation. TNT fucked Crusade terribly. Of the TV movies, only In the Beginning was any good. That's what, one in four? I saw nothing of Legend of the Rangers and I hear that's probably for the best.
Between the poor quality of the successor projects and the difficulty of getting anything good on the air in today's television market, the success of the original series is all the more remarkable. If you simply look at the odds, this show never should have happened, a statistical fluke. But the impossible happened. I wonder if JMS can make the impossible happen twice.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Somehow, my coffee-deprived eyes read that as "Commander Lockley looks extra sexy with a goatse"... and the mental imagery was vivid and horrifying.
@yg
It's SciFi damnit! I can accept that sort of thing if there's a proper explanation. Telepathy is well-explained in the show so it's not just goofy paranormal stuff. Artificial gravity, reactionless propulsion drives, beam weapons, all are explained within the context of the show. This is far future science fiction so the existence of impossibly advanced technology is a given for the setting. Things that bother me more are obvious stupids like Garibaldi's steampipe gun (yes, using steam to fire bullets in sequence.) Delenn's bone becoming a barrette also struck me as very odd but that's more a matter of aesthetics. I think she looked better as a straight minbari and the whole transformation thing never really sat right with me from a storytelling perspective.
As for questions of the soul, that's an area of pure speculation, same with prophecy. So long as JMS keeps what he presents self-consistent, all is good. Personally, I hate prophecy storylines because they've been done to fucking death. I think it's poor storytelling. But I have seen good stories with precognition. For some stories the precognition goes along the lines of extremely educated guesses, like a chess master considering the state of the board eight moves ahead, only in this case there are a million more variables to consider. In that case, the turning points upon which the future rests become matters of extreme importance and there's always the danger of the Influential Man, the wildcard that can throw off all predictions. I've also seen good stories that use a more mystical means of showing the future. The worst ones have the future written in stone with fate and destiny shackling everyone to a fixed course of action. The better ones have precognition show a web of potentialities for the future, the seer catching quantum ripples chasing down from future to past. All and none of these futures exist and only the present exists to make those potentials real, cementing them into past.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
The last, best hope for Babylon 5 died when Straczynski was forced to rush the ending of the original story arc after Season 3. Everything that came after that, including that godawful thing with Lumbergh, was just unwatchable.
The best thing about B5 was that, originally, it actually felt like you were in a big universe. The most brilliant scene in the entire show was when Catherine Sakai is telling G'Kar about the time her ship lost power when "something" -- an object so huge it blotted out the sun -- cruised by. Sakai describes what happened and asks G'Kar what the thing might have been. They're standing in the garden, and G'Kar sees an ant crawling up a flower stem. He puts his finger on the stem, the ant crawls onto it and onto his hand, and then after a few seconds he lets the ant crawl back onto the flower. He looks at Sakai and says, "That ant meets another ant and asks, what was that?..."
But after the third season, all that was out the window, and all that was left was a bad space combat show.
I think that you give the game away with that sentence. The fact that you describe it as boring suggests that you've not watched many episodes, after all if it is 'boring' then why would you? This is further born out by focusing on the 'psi power' element of the show, which although very much present isn't the only game in town. Even here your assertion that psi power has never worked too well too well in sf seems slightly dubious in the light of how many creators have bundled it into their work. It seems that everyone from Alfred Bester, who wrote the 'The demolished man' to George Lucas and his 'force' (ignoring midi-chlorians or what ever for the moment) have been quite happy to use it.
Also, given the number of people who bought the Babylon 5 box sets, releasing it as a direct-to-DVD movie seems to make perfect. This is a growing trend among series with a well established and perhaps older and richer fan base - see Stargate for another example. Whoever has done this is taking a risk, but not a very big one I think.
Finally what have you added to the sum of human knowledge, apart from the fact that you don't like Babylon 5 and that I disagree with you?
An interesting historical point. I wasn't aware of the distinction between science fiction and sci-fi - could you provide it?
I tend not to bother with distinctions that will have no meaning to people not part of the group that have chosen to make it; it's as bad as cheap marketing ploys. Wouldn't be surprised if the original poster was happily using SciFi as an abbreviation for science fiction, good or bad, great and small. I understand the idea of specualtive fiction, because you could discuss the difference between "science" and "speculation" to your average or intelligent person and still make sense. Even so, that's just to acknowledge someone's perspective - I don't think the term adds much value except for insider discussions.
I think Harlan Ellison created that "distinction in terms" when he made that statement. Not to say the distinction itself was not there, he just gave it name (however good or bad). What he was trying to point out is that what we now label as "sci-fi" got away from what "science fiction" was about. In general usage "sci-fi" came to mean stories that are about laser guns, robots, and women in bizarrely impractical tin foil outfits.Its stories that use "science" as a magical way to resolve issues without really dealing with them. It is stories that are more about the gadgets than people. It is about escaping the reality into world that has nothing to do with our own.
Science fiction on other hand is not about those things. It is about people and the world we live in. No matter how alien the setup is and what aliens, robots, etc are the subject of the story, good science fiction is always relevant to us here and now. All the standard "sci-fi" items are not the point of the story, they are just tools to set up the story in a way that may not be possible (or at least easy) with straight fiction.
There are many good examples of the distinction in recent movies - "I, Robot" the "science fiction" book was a deep examination of human behavior by extracting the idealized behavior and overlaying it on a machine and then viewing it from a human perspective (among many other things) - "I,Robot" - the "sci-fi" movie supposedly based on the book, but really about killer robots. Or "Mimsy were the Borgroves" - a brilliant short story about "nature vs nurture" and the effect of the toys on the way the mind develops - "The Last Mimzy" - a "sci-fi" movie based on the story that castrates any sort of meaning from original work and instead does a random children's adventure with even more random environmental message (where did that come from?)
B5, Firefly, etc all were good science fiction because if you take out the space ships and laser guns and aliens, you still got a strong story about something. I mean B5's big conflict of "community" vs "individual" is universal and applies just as well to "Vorlons" vs "Shadows" as it does to "USSR" vs "USA" in cold war or "socialism" vs "capitalism" in general. It is a fundamental conflict that's as old as time and instead of rehashing it again from one side or another, B5 shows what it is like to be the little guy caught in the middle.
Now, I just want to add, there is definitely a place for "sci-fi" out there and truth be told, I enjoyed both movies mentioned above - but there is no way I can call them good science fiction.
Although I see you have no problem making such subtle distinctions .. I'm wondering whether the definition of Sci-Fi will be a tautology that excludes the possibility of it ever being great fiction.
As I tried to explain above, I don't see this distinction as all that subtle. "Sci-Fi" as we come to know it is not meant to be good fiction - instead it meant to be the opposite - escapism and distraction.
But rather than dwell on trivia about the us
RelevantElephants: A Somatic WebComic...
"When we spoke about it, he laughed, and said, "Now that I'm dying I've never felt better!""
Oddly enough, that unscripted statement happens to be *quintessential* G'Kar..
Oddly enough, that unscripted statement happens to be *quintessential* G'Kar.. He also said he really liked the G'kar makeup and that he felt it made him look sleek and sexy. I'm not sure if that's from the heart or if he's just having a go at us. The practical jokes on the B5 set are the stuff of legends. On the set they used to call Andreas Two-Pack G'Kar on account of how much he smoked.
The practical joke battle I remember the most involved Andreas and Peter getting to a con presentation a little early. JMS hates public speaking and is always nervous. Those two rogues coached the audience to keep completely silent throughout the entire thing, no praises, no booing, no laughing, nothing. This goes on for the entire presentation, JMS only finds out later. Everyone had a good laugh, right? No harm, no foul? Not on your life.
JMS got his revenge with scripts. He'd written a full death scene for the guy who played Marcus after something he did, the joke not explained until after he was calling his agent for more work. JMS did far worse this time. The script goes out with a scene between Londo and G'kar, Londo's quarters. G'kar is in shadow. "You may have conquered my people, Mollari, but you have yet to conquer me." He steps from shadow and is revealed to be wearing a sheer teddy. The scene goes on from there, completely horrifying. The only quote I still remember is "My Gods, all eight at once!" So Peter and Andreas ask JMS where the real script is. "This is the real script," he deadpans, face completely serious. "Do you really think I have time to fuck around on a joke? This is what we're shooting, start learning your lines." He didn't pull out the real script until the last second.
The best part of all this is that Peter and Andreas did a reading of the script at a subsequent con. Man, that'd be something to have on Youtube.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
I was speaking about site which is referenced by the article and horrible choices made by webmaster himself or herself.
Going -1 levels is not big deal, it is just something Slashdot is on wrong path with recent editorial policy changes. They are trying to be some site which copied it and it will really fail horribly. Looks like the reader profile already made their way and actually got moderation points.
Dear newbie moderators: "off topic" means something out of topic, completely off the base. It doesn't mean "I don't agree with that comment", it means "It doesn't have anything to do with the submitted content". This is not Digg.com. You actually lose Karma after taking horrible decisions like that, this is not some kid site to play around and "sink" or "Digg" whatever you don't agree.
Point is: You don't "off topic" a comment which is based on the entire content of the website which is referenced at TFA.
There a real offtopic for you, idiots.