Should JMS be given credit with Behr, Berman, Piller, Moore etc
- Thread starter TheMasterOfOrion
- Start date
Re: Should JMS be given credit
StarTrek was many decades before Babylon-5, but B5 was came way before DS9
http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7652
Was B5 brought to Paramount?
Yes, it was, and I have the correspondence to prove it. Were some of the
development people at Paramount who read the B5 screenplay and saw the series treatment and bible also involved in the DS9 development? It seems that this is indeed the case. That's not unsubstantiated "bs" as you say, and I really don't care what you think on that subject. All of that is a matter of record.
Were Pillar and Berman aware of B5 at any time? No. Of that I am also confident. The only question in my mind is to what degree did the development people steer them?
In online interviews Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov, Bester) often talked about the freshness and originality of the B5 show, now why would a legend like Keonig who was always dedicated to Trek keep saying something like this ? Let's look at some of the other connections, both wanted charming characters but very different to Gene Roddenberry's original Star Trek vision and because war, terrorism, poverty etc feature so often in DS9 and its tone is totally unlike the other StarTrek's it is refered to the black sheep of the Star Trek family, the only problem being B5 came first. Deep Space Nine was not announced by Paramount until long after the announcement of B5 by Warner Bros. Both DS9 and B5 had spiritual beings enigmatic god like people, the Vorlons, the Prophets. B5 and DS9 both had shape shifters, and the two doctors from both shows had hidden secrets. Bashir had his genetic enhancement and Franklin's involvement with the underground. Other possible links Jeffrey Sinclair a war vet while DS9 had Sisko veteran of the fight at Wolf 359, the commander of each station eventually became a religious figure....I believe as Babylon-5 moved on - the tide started to turn the other way and the B5 people began to think if you can't beat them join them. This might be why Babylon-5 then started to borrow DS-9 ideas such as the allegation that the Whitestar was DS9 inspired since DS9's Defiant came first.
The difference between the people behind both shows, is that JMS and other B5 people seem to have no qualms about giving credit to Star Trek, Dune etc and how they inspired JMS and his work etc but Wolfe, Moore and the people are Paramount only get all emotional when the B5 connection is brought up and IMO this only adds more fuel to the theory a lot of borrowing was going on.
StarTrek was many decades before Babylon-5, but B5 was came way before DS9
http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-7652
Was B5 brought to Paramount?
Yes, it was, and I have the correspondence to prove it. Were some of the
development people at Paramount who read the B5 screenplay and saw the series treatment and bible also involved in the DS9 development? It seems that this is indeed the case. That's not unsubstantiated "bs" as you say, and I really don't care what you think on that subject. All of that is a matter of record.
Were Pillar and Berman aware of B5 at any time? No. Of that I am also confident. The only question in my mind is to what degree did the development people steer them?
In online interviews Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov, Bester) often talked about the freshness and originality of the B5 show, now why would a legend like Keonig who was always dedicated to Trek keep saying something like this ? Let's look at some of the other connections, both wanted charming characters but very different to Gene Roddenberry's original Star Trek vision and because war, terrorism, poverty etc feature so often in DS9 and its tone is totally unlike the other StarTrek's it is refered to the black sheep of the Star Trek family, the only problem being B5 came first. Deep Space Nine was not announced by Paramount until long after the announcement of B5 by Warner Bros. Both DS9 and B5 had spiritual beings enigmatic god like people, the Vorlons, the Prophets. B5 and DS9 both had shape shifters, and the two doctors from both shows had hidden secrets. Bashir had his genetic enhancement and Franklin's involvement with the underground. Other possible links Jeffrey Sinclair a war vet while DS9 had Sisko veteran of the fight at Wolf 359, the commander of each station eventually became a religious figure....I believe as Babylon-5 moved on - the tide started to turn the other way and the B5 people began to think if you can't beat them join them. This might be why Babylon-5 then started to borrow DS-9 ideas such as the allegation that the Whitestar was DS9 inspired since DS9's Defiant came first.
The difference between the people behind both shows, is that JMS and other B5 people seem to have no qualms about giving credit to Star Trek, Dune etc and how they inspired JMS and his work etc but Wolfe, Moore and the people are Paramount only get all emotional when the B5 connection is brought up and IMO this only adds more fuel to the theory a lot of borrowing was going on.
^ *sigh* 
And please don't use Walter Koenig's words in such a misleading manner.
Did you even bother to read the whole thread?
And please don't use Walter Koenig's words in such a misleading manner.
Last edited:
Yes, there are striking similarities. Yes, some of the ideas briefly touched on in DS9 got a more full development on B5 (and vice versa). Yes, it's odd that DS9's war arc went full-throttle (end of DS9 season 5) just as B5's war arc was wrapping up (end of B5 season 4).
No, I don't think there was any intentional copying.
If there was any copying, I suspect it was simply at the level of some writer throwing in a reference for fun, and having it end up becoming far more central than they intended. This could explain Bureau 13/Section 31, for instance.
In computer science research, it is not uncommon for papers to be published on new and original ideas by multiple people at approximately the same time, independently. It's not mysterious, it's just how things work. For the most part I think that's what happened here.
No, I don't think there was any intentional copying.
If there was any copying, I suspect it was simply at the level of some writer throwing in a reference for fun, and having it end up becoming far more central than they intended. This could explain Bureau 13/Section 31, for instance.
In computer science research, it is not uncommon for papers to be published on new and original ideas by multiple people at approximately the same time, independently. It's not mysterious, it's just how things work. For the most part I think that's what happened here.
Credit for what?
Thinking he was ripped off?
No. No credit at all.
Thinking he was ripped off?
No. No credit at all.
It seems to me that Niners tend to downplay the similarities and react with withering scorn at the patent absurdity of the very notion when these questions arise (as they admittedly have time and again); Fivers, on the other hand, play up the parallels and are inclined to righteous indignation at the idea that anyone could not see it, when it's (according to them) so obvious.
Robert Wolfe denies anything occurred; J. Michael Straczynski asserts it did.
We're left to formulate our own opinions on the matter.
Rather than offering mine, I'll do as Neroon recommends.
Robert Wolfe denies anything occurred; J. Michael Straczynski asserts it did.
We're left to formulate our own opinions on the matter.
Rather than offering mine, I'll do as Neroon recommends.
Oh, you mean like Jan and I did up there.
Oh, wait. We didn't.
Sorry, looks like you lost whatever little argument you were going for. It would appear that you're only trying to stir the pot. One wonders why you'd be doing such after so many years, especially since both series have been off the air for so long. What purpose does it serve? Why would anyone trust such accusations, especially when proven false before they were even made? Where are you going with this line of ill-reasoning? And who are you to judge anyone?
As a huge Babylon 5 fan and a fan of DS9 (but not as big as B5, I'll admit) let me just clarify a few things:
1) Ron Moore is, if I recall correctly, actually a fan of JMS's work and has said so. Any animosity between the two is made up.
2) JMS has made maybe a few remarks but in context they make a bit more sense since some Trekkers then hated the very idea of Babylon 5 and bashed the shit outta Joe.
3) Majel Barret was on B5 to show that there was no animosity between the two shows.
To say that either side is in the wrong is just petty.
1) Ron Moore is, if I recall correctly, actually a fan of JMS's work and has said so. Any animosity between the two is made up.
2) JMS has made maybe a few remarks but in context they make a bit more sense since some Trekkers then hated the very idea of Babylon 5 and bashed the shit outta Joe.
3) Majel Barret was on B5 to show that there was no animosity between the two shows.
To say that either side is in the wrong is just petty.
I think it's unfortunate that any discussion of the parallels between the shows is always overshadowed by the need to "place blame" by one group or the other.
Can't we just look at the end products and speculate on possible influences, without it becoming a religious crusade?
Can't we just look at the end products and speculate on possible influences, without it becoming a religious crusade?
Re: Should JMS be given credit
Dude. Grasp for straws much?
And there in lies the reason I hate arguments like this. People pull these insignificant points on their rear ends to throw onto the fire of a debate that seems to go on forever, and yet, in the grand scheme of things is completely and utterly pointless.
In this case, it seems to be propagated solely by fans who have yet to grasp the concept of "creative license."
One can pretty much take any two pieces of art and find similarities with more merit than the ones present here if he tries hard enough. The only reason this nonsense ever got a second look in the first place is because the shows were on at the same time.
If DS9 were on now, people wouldn't even think twice about it.
So, please, just get over it and either just enjoy the shows, or go bury your bone someplace else. [/rant]
Dude. Grasp for straws much?
And there in lies the reason I hate arguments like this. People pull these insignificant points on their rear ends to throw onto the fire of a debate that seems to go on forever, and yet, in the grand scheme of things is completely and utterly pointless.
In this case, it seems to be propagated solely by fans who have yet to grasp the concept of "creative license."
One can pretty much take any two pieces of art and find similarities with more merit than the ones present here if he tries hard enough. The only reason this nonsense ever got a second look in the first place is because the shows were on at the same time.
If DS9 were on now, people wouldn't even think twice about it.
So, please, just get over it and either just enjoy the shows, or go bury your bone someplace else. [/rant]
Actually ... no—unless any opinion along the spectrum other than "unquestionably there's nothing to this" constitutes stirring "the pot."
If so ... I'm guilty.
"Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa."
Oh, and ... I like both shows.
number6
Vice Admiral
Apparently not, as yet another "DS9 Ripped Off B5" thread seems to demontrate.
Read the portion of your post that I quoted above. You tried to ... no, actually, you outright said that Star Trek fans are above it all, and Babylon 5 fans are crazy people grasping at straws and trying to prolong this crap.
You know exactly what you said and exactly why you said it. You're doing nothing but trying to start an argument. Well, it's over. If you can't let it go after 15 years, then you, sir, need to grow the fuck up. I will say the same to anyone else trying to continue this petty war without end.
Years ago I came up with a list of storylines that DS9 aired first or Babylon 5 aired first. For example:
DS9 - Captain Sisko lost his wife at the hands of the galaxy's greatest nemesis (The Borg).
B5 - Captain Sherian lost his wife at the hands of the galaxy's greatest nemesis (The Shadows).
Of course the plot development concerning Sisko made it to television at least a few years before Sheridan's revelation was brought up. But, wait, you say? JMS obviously mentioned this to Berman and Co when he first tried to sell them the B5 storyline and obviously this particular character background was transferred to Sisko when the DS9 pilot was written, right? Um, no. Because Sheridan and his backstory wasn't initially part of the B5 storyline anyway. JMS only came up with Sheridan once he knew the Sinclair story wasn't going as well as he (or O'Hara) had hoped. JMS' storyline for Sheridan was therefore developed AFTER B5 first aired. So timeline goes....B5's pilot aired early in 1993. But the series didn't get off the ground until late 1993 or perhaps even early 1994. Sheridan didn't come around until the second season and the revelation of what happened to his wife Anna. So you are talking about an episode aired in either '94 or '95 that dealt with Anna's fate. But of course DS9's pilot aired in January of 1992. Therefore the Benjamin-Jennifer tragedy was introduced way before the John-Anna tragedy. But B5 fans will still insist that the Sisko as widower idea was stolen from JMS when all the evidence points elsewhere.
I can give you more examples of what DS9 did first and as well as what B5 clearly handled first. Doesn't mean either stole from one another; more like great minds think a like when they have a similair setting to work with. As a fan of both shows I wish this issue was dropped for good.
DS9 - Captain Sisko lost his wife at the hands of the galaxy's greatest nemesis (The Borg).
B5 - Captain Sherian lost his wife at the hands of the galaxy's greatest nemesis (The Shadows).
Of course the plot development concerning Sisko made it to television at least a few years before Sheridan's revelation was brought up. But, wait, you say? JMS obviously mentioned this to Berman and Co when he first tried to sell them the B5 storyline and obviously this particular character background was transferred to Sisko when the DS9 pilot was written, right? Um, no. Because Sheridan and his backstory wasn't initially part of the B5 storyline anyway. JMS only came up with Sheridan once he knew the Sinclair story wasn't going as well as he (or O'Hara) had hoped. JMS' storyline for Sheridan was therefore developed AFTER B5 first aired. So timeline goes....B5's pilot aired early in 1993. But the series didn't get off the ground until late 1993 or perhaps even early 1994. Sheridan didn't come around until the second season and the revelation of what happened to his wife Anna. So you are talking about an episode aired in either '94 or '95 that dealt with Anna's fate. But of course DS9's pilot aired in January of 1992. Therefore the Benjamin-Jennifer tragedy was introduced way before the John-Anna tragedy. But B5 fans will still insist that the Sisko as widower idea was stolen from JMS when all the evidence points elsewhere.
I can give you more examples of what DS9 did first and as well as what B5 clearly handled first. Doesn't mean either stole from one another; more like great minds think a like when they have a similair setting to work with. As a fan of both shows I wish this issue was dropped for good.
Last edited:
There's one last thing I want to say concerning this topic:
BOTH shows were great. Really great! Both were wonderful, consistent television. I just love them both. So I really don't care if there are a few similarites. Come to think of it, actually both shows did quite different kinds of episodes. Yeah, there may be general story threads they both have in common. But when it comes to the details they were really nothing alike.
Why can't we just leave it at that?
BOTH shows were great. Really great! Both were wonderful, consistent television. I just love them both. So I really don't care if there are a few similarites. Come to think of it, actually both shows did quite different kinds of episodes. Yeah, there may be general story threads they both have in common. But when it comes to the details they were really nothing alike.
Why can't we just leave it at that?
Um ... no. I meant that both sides tend to overreact, and nothing more. Evidently the phrase was unclear. My bad, obviously.
Yes, I do ... and it's not what you think. I'm now officially half past give a shit whether you believe me.
At this point, that'll be a relief.
[Isn't that last a Babylon Five ep title? Nice mid-rant reference there.]
I made a single comment, about which you have been bitching, accusing, moaning (and now insulting/cursing) ever since.
Who would you say has the problem letting it go?
No it's not. Any "side" making the claim that DS9 "borrowed", "stole" or "copied" even one single thing from B5 is simply flat-out, dead wrong.
In regard to what Moore said about B5, I've seen this quote linked to from this website before about what Moore had to say about it:
If there is a more recent quote where Moore has changed his mind and watched or praised B5, please provide it since I have never read that and am interested to read it, if it does in fact exist.
Not saying you're wrong, but exactly what do fans of both (like myself) do?
I'm sorry, but that's just as close-minded as saying JMS deserves a credit on DS9.
To use a B5 quote (admittedly by a bad guy).....
While I agree that the minds behind DS9 probably didn't intentionally set out to copy B5, there are other factors in play. Who's to say a network suit didn't make some suggestions based on stuff on "that other show", for example?
There are similarities. That much everyone with half a brain can see. Speculation on where those similarities arose from is harmless, and should not be squelched just because some have a tendency to be overly accusatory when discussing them.
Similar threads
