That is even less relevant. You said perfect people, yet not so. You said who do no wrong, yet not so.
Can you recommend a show for a fan of TOS and Babylon 5, but not the other Trek series?
- Thread starter nagyvezír
- Start date
Delenn and Sheridan weren't morally ambiguous, but they had their own demons and their own problems that they had to deal with. Garibaldi was far from perfect either; he was loyal to his boss but not so much to Earthforce after they pink-slipped him; he suffered from alcohol abuse and he suffered from his forced brainwashing.
In contrast, Picard suffered from baldness.
If their flaws get glossed over, and their actions all excused, then the story does mean them to be perfect.
Sheridan's wife tries to get him to join the Shadows? Nope, turns out she was a mindless puppet and thus Sheridan can kill her and destroy their city and be a hero.
Using the telepaths to stop the Earthforce fleet at Mars even if this will kill the telepaths? Turns out they couldn't be saved anyways so there's nothing wrong with doing this.
Creating a Cult of Personality? Garibaldi points out the problems in this, but then because he was brainwashed somehow this means he was wrong about the Cultism.
Delenn's role in starting the Earth-Minbari war? Glossed over in one episode.
Garibaldi betraying Sheridan to Clarke? Turns out he was brainwashed into doing so.
G'Kar and Londo are the only really complex characters here who have to live with their actions.
Apparently if TNG portrays their characters as arrogant and intolerant of some things, it's bad. But if B5 does this stuff it's good.
Delenn's and Sheridan's clarity of moral focus was well addressed in 'Comes the Inquisitor' and asking when moral clarity becomes fanaticism. They could both ask what if they were wrong and often did.
None of which changes that the main cast were not perfect and they did face consequences for their actions. Your opinion doesn't stand up.
They did not face consequences, at all. Especially not when confronted with a pathetic strawman like Jack the Inquisitor.
Hell, in "Deconstruction of Falling Stars" when those future historians are debating whatever flaws Sheridan had JMS had Delenn come in and say "Shame on you for not thinking Sheridan was a perfect hero!" and that was that.
If they can get away with that, I don't see why the TNG era people are to be condemned for merely treating the 20th century the way the 20th century treats its own past.
They faced consequences. Just because you didn't like how the show handled the consequences doesn't change that your statement that they were perfect and faced no consequences doesn't hold up. No idea why you keep bringing up TNG, nor do I care.
Let's not derail the thread further.
The only "good guy" leads on B5 are Sheridan and Delenn, and the fact that JMS wrote them as very Mary Sue-esque heroes does detract from the show, I agree. All in all it's much better than Star Trek in that point.
I don't know where you live, but in my native country (Hungary) and the two other countries I have lived in (Turkey and the UK) people tend to have pride in their history. That doesn't mean that everything is seen as some sort of ideal, because that isn't real, but I haven't ever heard someone slur the whole of the peoples of the past as savage brutes.
You seem as though you've taken this thread very personally.
Babylon 5 is far from a perfect show, but unlike Star Trek: TNG the human characters still act like normal humans, not sneering utopians. It's also important to note that the main characters and Earth are shown to not always be good/do good on Babylon, whereas on Star Trek the Federation is portrayed as some great force of unquestionable good, when they did things like incite the Dominion to war, or where they're intolerant of cultures and values that aren't their own while making it as if they're better than everyone because they're so tolerant, that's just hypocrisy.
The Romulans and the Cardassians are the best races of Star Trek, as are the original series Klingons before they became nothing more than monsters.
I'm going to bolster support for:
Farscape
Firefly
Battlestar Galactica
Stargate SG*1
Farscape
Firefly
Battlestar Galactica
Stargate SG*1
Thank you. I've decided to start off with Battlestar Galactica, Blake's 7 and Raumpatrouille Orion and then move on to Stargate SG-1 and Firefly.
Here is my question, which Battlestar Gallactica should I start with? The original series, or the reboot?
The reboot.
Doesn't that make them fallible and human, then?
As for the rebooted BSG, the show runs out of steam after the first 2 seasons and falls apart after that. The older show may be dated but still is ultimately enjoyable.
The original has an awesome theme but the story is very light and family friendly for its topic. Its cheese factor is right up there with Gil Gerards's Buck Rogers. The reboot takes the theme far more darkly and seriously.
It's dated. The themes are there to be enjoyed and the followup Galactica 1980 is almost universally agreed upon as horrid.
@Gov Kodos is right in that the reboot takes the themes and makes them more relevant.
Wow, Orion is a real deep cut selection.
Those seem like a good starting point IMO.
Those seem like a good starting point IMO.
For the op, two shows he might want to check out are "Flash Gordon" (1950's series not the 2007 series) and "Rocky Jones Space Ranger". Both are from the 50's, and have fallen into the Public Domain, so the SFX may look dated, but both are good shows.
Similar threads
