Text 16924, 77 rader
Skriven 2007-08-08 16:09:20 av StarFuryG7 (3401.babylon5)
  Kommentar till text 16856 av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated (3333.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: "Babylon 5: The Lost Tales" - A Review (SPOILER Warning)
====================================================================
> >         The special effects work was good, and it pains me to say
> > this, especially since it was one of the better attributes of this
> > production, but I nevertheless think the CGI work in "Legend of the
> > Rangers" was better.

On Aug 7, 8:15 pm, "Mac Breck" <macthevor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I COMPLETELY disagree with that.  The ONLY things in the B5:LotR pilot
> that were better, was the fact that they had SETS, real, physical sets
> in the B5:LotR pilot

        I don't think the sets in LotR were even that good (in fact,
they were pretty lousy), but I still feel the FX work there was
sharper, better and more dynamic.

>
> In B5-TLT, IMHO, every space shot and model is exquisite.  Ditto for the
> planetary background on Minbar.  Hyperspace/Quantumspace entry and exit
> vortices, and the almost fabric-like nature of that space itself, are
> the best I've ever seen.  :D
>

        You're shortchanging the work that was done for LotR by
comparison in my opinion.

> Where the CGI in B5:TLT falls down is the background of Lochley's
> quarters, the hallways in the first story (except for the hallway in the
> very first scene, which looked better than the rest) and the docking bay
> in both stories.  In all of those cases, the CGI backgrounds just didn't
> look real.

        I found the opening hallways scenes flawed, but those seemed
to improve beyond that point.  

> In Lochley's quarters, the lamps looked almost 2D, and the
> lampshades looked like one was made and then copied to make the other,
> and both were perfectly symmetrical and sharply edged.  The background
> looked like an illustration in a magazine, 2D.  Same for the hallways.

        Just so we're clear --I wasn't talking about that kind of
internal CGI work when comparing it to "Legend of the Rangers."

> > Why would Warner Bros. issue an enthusiastic press
> > release concerning their venturing into the direct-to-DVD market
> > beginning with this release, and then not provide adequate funds to
> > make the production a bit more impressive?
>
> Because they're tightwads and wanted JMS & Co. to pull off a miracle,
> even though Warner Brothers themselves handicaped the production by
> losing all the CGI files, and having almost none of the B5 sets, props
> and wardrobe available?  HOPEFULLY, the sales of this first DVD will
> cause WB to give JMS a lot bigger budget, to include a rebuilding of the
> B5 & Crusade sets, CGI , wardrobe and props, and get more of the main
> cast and more extras in the future DVDs.

        The problem I have with this is that the sets wouldn't have
been all that elaborate or expensive to build in order to make this
production just moderately more impressive. And hiring extras to make
the Station and other scenes look busier shouldn't have been beyond
their means either, which is why I suspect this was looked upon as an
experiment by all parties involved: JMS, and WB. However, the movie
suffered because of it nonetheless.

> >         I liked the battle sequence in space in this second story, but
> > it was too short and seemed out of place.
>
> Naah.  It was another of Galen's revelations to Sheridan, like the
> destruction of NYC.  It fit.

        It struck me as a throw-in; Galen had already laid the
groundwork and explained the situation to Sheridan when he showed him
the destruction of NY. This scene was just to further drive the point
home, but it looked like just an excuse to throw some eye candy at the
audience. There were no cockpit scenes, no characters to care about--
just a quick-flash external battle, and before you knew it, it was
already over.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)