Talk all you want about Babylon 5 in here (spoilers aplenty)

[Fist McStrongpunch]

Well, no one can seem to not talk about B5 spoilers in that other thread with the no spoilers tag in the title, to the point that it seems half of each page is spoiler-coded. So here's a place you can talk all you want about Shadows and Psi-Corps and stims and Byron and all that great stuff.

Not that I actually think this'll work, but it's worth a shot.

Here's some starting points:

The Sheridan storyline actually does have a subtle tie-in to the next episode, although it's not something you'd notice if you weren't looking for it.

Spoiler: That subtle tie in to next episode

Franklin saying he knows a good Markab doctor?

Yep.

Spoiler: That subtle tie in

But also that there's a Markab in the episode, albeit a dead one. This is one of the few times prior to "Confessions and Lamentations" they're ever mentioned by name, also.

I have a general B5 question, that I didn't want to start a whole new thread for (but will if it's inappropriate to do here under spoiler cover), so here it is.

Spoiler: Shadows

Do they ever stop being inept?

Spoiler: Shadows

Not really, insofar as they are still guys which our heroes can think of whats to outsmart or outmanouvre, and not all of those ways are airtight genius.

I'll give them Mars, though. That ship wasn't in control - and as for the humans, well, the humans are basically being used as part of the ship. That's beneath the Shadows, surely.

Spoiler: Shadows

And since I said so many negative things, I want to say something positive. The Shadows' creature design, and their capital ship design, are absolutely, chillingly beautiful. Whoever came up with those, are geniuses. A lot of the designs and CGI in B5 are kinda standard (Earth Force excepted), and the White Star just leaves me cold, but the Shadows--they are iconic and terrifying.

Eh. Honestly, not a fan of the Shadow starships. They're big black spider-things. I like the Minbari cruiser though, fins and all.

 

[Lindley]

to the point that it seems half of each page is spoiler-coded.

It isn't nearly that bad.

Any "No Spoilers" in the title applies only to uncoded spoilers. It doesn't mean you can't use the spoiler tag when necessary to clarify something.

Still, can't hurt to give people the second outlet.

 

[RandyS]

You mean I can come in here and say what I want about my favorite Non-Star Trek sci-fi series, and not have to worry about getting my ass chewed out over spoilers?

Great.

Then let me get the ball rolling:

Who else besides me was annoyed by the fact that we didn't get to see enough of President Clark and why he did the things he did? Think about it, he was a major bad guy in the series, but we only got to see him THREE times. I personally was hoping this oversight would be rectified in a Lost Tales DVD, but it doesn't look like that's gonna happen now. Hopefully somebody (preferably JMS, since he created the character) will write a novel on this, but since the last book came out I believe nine years ago, that might not happen either.

Discuss.

 

[sidious618]

JMS said he wanted Clark to be a shadowy figure who could be almost anyone. I liked that approach.

 

[Hyperspace05]

Yeah, I think that's ok. We don't need to know the background and motivation of every background character (even villains). Sometimes it helps the drama to not know *exactly* what or who your heroes are up against.

 

[Myasishchev]

With all the tag-hidden stuff in Ben's thread, how was it I broke the camel's back?

Anyway, yeah, the Shadows are some pretty unthreatening dudes. Seriously weaksauce for all the build-up they got.

 

[StarshipDefiant]

I kind of liked how we didn't see president Clark very much, we only got to see the backlash of his actions (or or heroes actions as he responded to them), and what kind of effect the actions had on people. I mean, it was kind of neat to show people being on the receiving end of the propaganda, without seeing to much of the people that make the propaganda.

As for ships and CGI? I liked a lot of the designs we saw over the course of the series (and the movies I have seen so far, and what I have seen of Crusade), a lot of it may see somewhat hokey now (if not for the color patterns of the ships), because of what CGI spacecraft can look like now, in shows like Battlestar Galactica, but I think overall, they had done a pretty good job. The exterior design, IMO, of the White Star-class was beautiful. I also liked the Earthforce/Earth Alliance designs, they seemed very Human, IMO and look as if they could have a design lineage that could be traced Watercraft/Aircraft a lot of our military (or civilian) markets use today. I also like how there was an attempt to try and make alien vessels look...well, alien, with a minimal reuse in stock models as possible (I can't recall to much of it going on). I also liked how each species had a clear difference in design for their ships.

Then of course...there was the story, I guess Season 5 suffered from a lot of things, namely that it had new characters, and that some things we could have seen were in fact, in season four because of the then possible demise of the series. I see season five now, as akin to season one, it suffered because it was trying to set up things we shall never get to (presumably) see, even taking the short run of Crusade into account, some of the set up in season five was for things in the time period between B5 and Crusade.

It's a shame that as the years have gone on, the additions to the franchise haven't done that well. I haven't seen it yet, but have been told the Rangers movie doesn't really add much, so it's not really worth watching. A shame.

Babylon 5 proves to me, that despite what some writers and producers would say and have us think, you can (reasonably) plan many things out for a series (or a franchise possibly) while leaving open ground for creativity and new ideas (I think I just said the same thing there, sorry) while at the same time, providing a general direction (or directions, as it were, with JMS making trap doors) for a beginning, middle and an end to a series.

I can somewhat see why some don't do that, studio/network/whatever interference, having multiple, multiple writers and not knowing how long the show could last (if it does at all), and then if it does become a hit, should you actually end it in five years, or not? More? Less? Still, if B5 were to say anything, is that some preplaning and foresight can allow for a good story, while leaving the writers some room.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Anyway, yeah, the Shadows are some pretty unthreatening dudes. Seriously weaksauce for all the build-up they got.

Well, I think the point is the Shadow's goal is to effect the behaviour of others. They don't want to do all the work of destroying, etc, themselves- that'd defeat the whole purpose. They aim to encourage the younger races. Do they even want to be a "threat?" That's how we and the younger races view them- it isn't how they would describe their agenda, though. They're teachers and guides (even if they've lost track of the actual point just like their counterpart teachers the Vorlons). They aim to spread war and chaos for the good of the younger races- if that means attacking they do it (see how quickly they wiped out Narn outposts to set up/start/finish the Narn-Centauri war, or how they aimed to demoralize everyone by destroying refugees massed in Sector 83), but more often they like to whisper in the ears of younger races and let them be threats to one another- which is the whole point. The younger races battle, the strong thrive on the discarded remains of the weak, who are weeded out. Chaos through warfare. Evolution through bloodshed. Perfection through victory. The Shadows set it all up and help it along from time to time, but ideally it shouldn't be the Shadows themselves destroying the weak, but the younger races destroying one another, the victors becoming stronger for it.

They're Shadows. They hang around in the dark places and work through others- they encourage you to be the instrument of destruction for your neighbour, they don't do it themselves. The Shadows could easily have wiped out Narn, say, if they wanted- their goal, though, was to lay the groundwork so the Centauri would destroy Narn. The Shadows don't want to be a threat- they make everyone else the threat.

Of course, once the Vorlons broke out the planet-killers all bets were off, the Shadows responded with their own superweapons and it devolved into a "destroy everyone touched by the enemy!" war for both sides.

 

[neozeks]

Talking about Clarke, was anyone else seriously annoyed with

Spoiler: I think Myasishchev hasn't gotten to the second part of S4 yet

him trying to destroy Earth at the end of civil war arc? I mean, it was thoroughly obvious that Sheridan would win (what, with the White Stars and all) and the main tension was in how to do as little damage as possible and prove he was fighting the good cause to Earthers. And then, any ambiguity gets wiped away, Clarke does a obvious 'MWHAHA Evil Fuhrer' thing, Sheridan rushes in to save the day and everything is solved.

D'oh! I think I just defeated the purpose of the thread.

 

[Jan]

Who else besides me was annoyed by the fact that we didn't get to see enough of President Clark and why he did the things he did?

Nope, not annoyed at all. It doesn't matter why he did the things he did, just that he did them.

Jan

 

[RandyS]

JMS said he wanted Clark to be a shadowy figure who could be almost anyone. I liked that approach.

Then he should have been kept that way. The only time that was the case was his last scene, and by and by then, we had seen him.

JMS said that? Now see, I didn't know that.

 

[Jan]

Here's a post JMS made when asked a similar question about Clark:

>JMS, you've always tried to show every point of view and what motivates your
>characters. Why have you not shown Clark's point of view?

I tried to do it through his lieutenants and plenepotentiaries (hope I spelled
that right, I'm too tired to get the dictionary down). ISN gives you his
point of view, ditto for Nightwatch, MiniPax, others. I think if I had him
just saying it out loud, it would diminish him much the way that repeated
exposure to the shadow vessels gradually removed their mystery and menace.
Less is more.


jms

Jan

 

[RandyS]

Who else besides me was annoyed by the fact that we didn't get to see enough of President Clark and why he did the things he did?

Nope, not annoyed at all. It doesn't matter why he did the things he did, just that he did them.

Jan

It doesn't matter why a major opponet to the main characters did what he did? Then why have him at all? They were already fighting the Shadows, and we got a complete explaination about that. Of course, I guess that doesn't matter either.

 

[Jan]

It doesn't matter why a major opponet to the main characters did what he did? Then why have him at all? They were already fighting the Shadows, and we got a complete explaination about that. Of course, I guess that doesn't matter either.

Not really. Clark *might* have had valid concerns about alien influences on Earth and the Psi Corps *could* have taken advantage of that. Or he *possibly* had a Keeper on him that made him do those things.

We know as much as we need to know: That he engineered the assassination of President Santiago, instituted Martial Law on a pretext and ordered the slaughter of civilians. That's plenty for our main characters to base their fight on because there was plenty of power being gained by Clark and his allies.

The Shadows were a different story because there was apparantly nothing to be gained by their actions. Working behind the scenes to get races to fight each other, conquering worlds but not sticking around to secure them, etc. Without knowing what drove them, and the Vorlons, too, Sheridan and co. would never have been able to finish it all forever, only bring it to a draw. Given the explanaition, we discovered why Sheridan and Delenn were so important, too.

Jan

 

[Kegg]

I'm fine not seeing Clarke because I suspect the more scenes he would have got the less interesting he would become. The Clarke advocates we saw on the series were rather small minded and pathetic, and while it's possible to - let's be honest - portray President Nixon in fascinating ways (simply in terms of narrative he may be the American President with the most potential) - Clarke is a little too small and too obvious to have the complications of a great Nixon archetype. The scenes with various Clarke agencies tended to be hectoring and overly obvious as far as tales of totalitarianism go.

Yes, even Futurama's take, that is, Richard Nixon's Head, is probably more interesting.

With all the tag-hidden stuff in Ben's thread, how was it I broke the camel's back?

It was me, rather than you. But hell, you were spoiler-tagging comments about how awesome the Shadow ships look - overkill much?

Anyway, yeah, the Shadows are some pretty unthreatening dudes. Seriously weaksauce for all the build-up they got.

Temis the Vorta has put it best elsewhere; JMS is pretty lousy at good villains. He likes having weak villains his heroes can wash away more often than not. I suspect it's something he shares in common with Ayn Rand; both authors have a rather obvious, hectoring point in their work (not coincidentally, the greatness inherent in individuals, rather than societies or states); and their villains are often very small; anti-greatness to the greatness of the leads, the men who could never be obstructing those that can. JMS complicates it with his nefarious agents of ancient evil stuff, just as Rand complicated it with the nefarious agent of socialism, Ellsworth Toohey.

Hm. JMS and Rand, there's an interesting strand of thought. One of my least favourite scenes in the whole damn series -

Spoiler: S4 finale, yes, IRONY

Delenn defending the Great Man archetype

- is also quintessentially a Randian scene. Make it Dominique Francon and Howard Roark and you'd barely have to change anything else.

 

[Forbin]

We knew everything about Clarke that our heroes knew, since we were seeing things from their POV. That was enough.

 

[Myasishchev]

I'm fine not seeing Clarke because I suspect the more scenes he would have got the less interesting he would become. The Clarke advocates we saw on the series were rather small minded and pathetic, and while it's possible to - let's be honest - portray President Nixon in fascinating ways (simply in terms of narrative he may be the American President with the most potential) - Clarke is a little too small and too obvious to have the complications of a great Nixon archetype. The scenes with various Clarke agencies tended to be hectoring and overly obvious as far as tales of totalitarianism go.

Concur. The hot political officer from "Voice of Authority" is so OTT ridiculous that it's kind of impossible to take her seriously, and by extension the fascism of President Clarke. When the New Totalitarianism comes, it is not going to be that obvious. It wasn't even that obvious when the Old Totalitarianism came. If from nothing more than a strategic perspective, it's pretty important to not go directly into crazy Stalinism from Western democracy when the old guard still has complete access to nuclear weapons and orbital bombardment devices.

On the other hand, is it just me, or did Sheridan sort of prove Clarke right? I mean, Nightwatch kept going on about seditious officers who were plotting with aliens and working against Earth, which is exactly what Sheridan and company were doing the entire time. Of course, Sheridan is in the moral right, but Clarke's side was technically correct.

Another random question: the Centauri have a non-aggression pact with Earth, so why do they keep an ambassador on B5 after the secession? Shouldn't Londo have been immediately recalled and formal diplomatic channels terminated with the rebels?

...Of course, once the Vorlons broke out the planet-killers all bets were off, the Shadows responded with their own superweapons and it devolved into a "destroy everyone touched by the enemy!" war for both sides.

All right!

Okay, what you say makes some sense. I still kind of wish that the Shadows had won an engagement or two that we saw. I was rather hoping that the counteroffensive against the Shadows, when Sheridan determined their plan to corrall the refugees, was going to end in bloody defeat, proving the Shadows' ultimate awesomeness.

 

[Lindley]

Another random question: the Centauri have a non-aggression pact with Earth, so why do they keep an ambassador on B5 after the secession? Shouldn't Londo have been immediately recalled and formal diplomatic channels terminated with the rebels?

You'd think that. However, B5 wasn't just about Earth relations; its purpose was as much for the other races to talk to each other as to talk to Earth.

 

[Candlelight]

I have very few gripes about this series. Season Five was disappointing from the perspective that Season Four ended many storylines due to possible cancellation, so starting from near-scratch with a new lead female actress, Sheridan being removed from the station running, new post-civil war story with the interstellar alliance being formed it felt like a new show. Plus the first half of the season was wasted on a story many fans felt was sub par.

Other than that I would have minor quibbles which I guess also lead on from a production perspective, like changing the arc removed the need for the Great Machine on Epsilon 3 later in the show's life, the change of lead actor after season one, etc.

Crusade was frustrating in that JMS didn't work on the 13+9 production like he had done with the first season of B5 (although we wouldn't have got A Voice in the Wilderness or Babylon Squared, mind). If he had, we might've got the more arc heavy episodes like To The Ends of the Earth and End of the Line.

 

[Kegg]

The Night Watch is absolutely right because sedition is an expected consequence of the transition from democratic to totalitarian government - there are going to be people who are against that and may move directly. It's the aims, rather than the assumptions, that are at issue here.

Another random question: the Centauri have a non-aggression pact with Earth, so why do they keep an ambassador on B5 after the secession? Shouldn't Londo have been immediately recalled and formal diplomatic channels terminated with the rebels?

You'd think that. However, B5 wasn't just about Earth relations; its purpose was as much for the other races to talk to each other as to talk to Earth.

However keeping an Ambassador there does mean that they're recognizing Babylon 5 as legitimate in some capacity.

Institutionally, though, I'd say Babylon 5 begins making less sense post-secession, when compared to how it ran prior to that.