Text 13970, 228 rader
Skriven 2007-04-25 04:46:14 av Vorlonagent (333.babylon5)
Kommentar till en text av rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated
Ärende: Re: Attn JMS: The five stages of grief and "FALLEN SON: THE DEATH
===============================================================================
"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7s8t23964skjik96cfcq9mhi1lgohpubvk@4ax.com...
>>I don't grade on a curve.
>>
>>Everybody earns their place by passing or failing the same standards. And
>>I'm a tough sell. I have loopholes for work that doesn't take itself
>>seriously or presents itself with originality or style. I could easily
>>put
>>modern BSG on this list. It made points for originality but chipped away
>>at
>>my suspension of disbelief over time.
>
> Mine too -- I have the impression that BSG just wasn't conceived to
> fill as many episodes as it did, and when it became apparent that it
> was going to be a long-running show they had to make some rather hokey
> character and plot changes to make it work.
>
> Anyway, when it comes to books and other works of art, I do grade on a
> curve, because if I didn't, I'd have very few books to read! Just as I
> can enjoy a hot dog or a burger even though they aren't as good as
> lobster or sirloin. I mean, how many works have characterizations as
> good as Hamlet's? None, really, or almost none. So I'm happy if I find
> a character engaging, and happier still if I can learn something or
> see something in that character that reminds me of the complexities of
> life rather than the stock characters in other stories. At his best,
> Card does that for me.
Card apparently made some points with you that he didn't with me.
Nor do I apply the same standards for a good burger as for a good steak.
But there are standards I apply for both. I know what a good steak is and I
know what a good burger is. I do not say of a bad burger, "well I knew I
wasn't getting steak", I say "it's a bad burger by 'burger' standards".
That's what I mean by loopholes. You characters don't need to be as vivid
if you telegraph to me that the show is not intended for them to be.
Farscape is a good example of this. Especially the early seasons. It's
supposed to be fun so it gets judged to a different standard. B5, on the
other hand, is intentionally serious and dramatic, which means I expect more
characterization and care from B5 than Farscape. And that's why I dislike
Sinclair, Gideon, Galen and...no *especially*...Byron. Why also BSG
ultimately failed. It presented itself such that it was judged by the
standards I judge B5 on.
I work of a variant of "Fuzzy Pink Niven's Law" which says in brief "never
eat an inferior hot fudge sundae". The food you eat may concern you or your
dressmeaker, but the point here is that if you're going to consume the
calories you should get a good bang for your buck.
My list here is a list of inferior hot fudge sundaes that other people rave
about.
> (Having tried my hand at character creation, I can say that it's a
> /lot/ harder than it seems to create someone that's not a paper
> cutout. For me, anyway, and I suspect for the many writers who copy
> and recopy the rare originals, the Ahabs and the Falstaffs and the
> Sherlocks and the Hucks.)
The best often take on a life of their own. The ones that stay shallow are
the ones that remain intellectualized concepts.
>>>>Neither of the G's had it. Neither of the G's looked like they were
>>>>getting
>>>>it. They were both bland and flat characters to me.
>>>
>>> I think, though, that Galen /had/ to be played like that. I don't know
>>> how much range he had as an actor, but without spoiling the technomage
>>> trilogy I can say that there's a reason, that the hard-shelled reserve
>>> is an accurate depiction of something which wasn't explained in
>>> Crusade.
>>
>>Nobody *has* to be played like anything. There's a lot of ways to play
>>your
>>cards close to the vest and still be expressive. Spock or Kosh to name
>>two
>>(three?)
>>
>>Galen did not come off magical, he came off dull and hackneyed.
>
> But he wasn't supposed to come off magical. That's in the books: the
> technomages aren't Merlins, they're something altogether different.
> Maybe another player could have done a better job with the role while
> remaining faithful to the story -- I don't know -- but the technomages
> aren't in the least bit magical and they aren't by nature good.
> They're walking around with the equivalent of an abscessed tooth and
> they're trying to suppress the symptoms. That's the best I can do
> without spoiling the story.
I've seen the shots of Galen's back with his shirt off. I think I see what
you mean.
I think it was in the portrayal.
Elric *was* magical. Maybe that's just the actor coming through. But the
magic seemd to die with him leaving people with bits of what I assume to be
organic technology grafted to them. That's not what I saw when I saw Elric
and I'm still a little disappointed.
>>Gideon inherited all of Sinclair's downside, his stick-up-his-butt
>>moralism
>>(a strange characteristic in a man phrased as a "gambler").
>
> I suspect we'd all like to hang out with Tony Soprano rather than the
> preacher -- until we end up wishing that we'd hung out with the
> preacher instead. But stick-up-the-ass characters can work -- Picard I
> think being the prime example of that -- if the acting and writing is
> right.
True. Then Trek went and tried to make every station or ship commander a
parental figure. :P
But my point was the conflict. The high moral horse preacher is also a
gambler? It didn't work.
> Some of Gideon's inconsistency may have been a result of meddling by
> TNT. It's been a long time, but didn't their pressure lead to the
> not-very-convincing fight with the mutinous crew members at the
> beginning? Also, I've noticed that characters tend to mutate a bit and
> then firm up as a show progresses and the writers and actors fall into
> their groove. It seems that a writer can start off thinking "I want a
> rough-edged, imperfect captain," and write that into the pilot, and by
> Episode 6 the fellow has turned into Joan of Arc.
Gideon's portrayal looked sadly consistent to me.
>>> As to poor Byron, I confess I'm the sole and solitary member of his
>>> fan club. Maybe I should defend Wesley Crusher next . . . Seriously, I
>>> never thought that Byron was motivated primarily by self-pity: he's an
>>> idealist who is consumed with guilt over his role in the massacre of
>>> innocent civilians.
>>
>>You reckon without Byron's self-destructive side. The man was looking for
>>a
>>cause to die for, not one to live for. He was stuck in his own guilt and
>>self-hatred. It was all about him, about his mistake and atoning for it.
>>Maybe that's not self-pity but it's certainly a depth of self-absorbtion.
>
> That seems to be a frequent trope on television and for that matter
> literature -- a character who's done something terrible and spends the
> rest of his life atoning for it by doing good. I mean, look at Xena!
> But I would argue that, IRL anyway, such characters aren't just about
> themselves: the fact that they feel /guilt/ about what they did means
> that they feel for others. The sociopath or near-sociopath just
> wouldn't care. Your more typical real world evildoer would probably
> rationalize his way out of feeling guilt.
I'm not saying that a cgaarcter driven to atone for a sin can't be good.
I'm saying Byron wasn't. Byron wallowed in his guilt. Byron let it eat out
his soul. Byron chose an easy death instead of standing up and fighting
for what was important to him.
>>Maybe, but...why tie everything to the First Ones? It suggests a small
>>minded view of the world.
>
> Guess you'd have to ask JMS. But while I know what you're saying, and,
> really, felt somewhat the same way when I first learned about it, I do
> think it's in keeping with the series premise, which is that
> everything /is/ tied in with the Vorlons and the Shadows, who have
> after all been meddling in our affairs since we were mice.
And nothing new happens everywhere? Nothing unique springs up in some
half-forgotten backwater or lonely outpost of civilization? There is
diveristy in the universe and origins should reflect it, not fly in the face
of it.
Are the Vorlons or Shadows responsible for the Soul Hunters? Just asking
that question threatens to rob them of half their identity, just as the
Shadow origin robs the technomages of half theirs. (the magic part)
>>I have a very thin boundary between reality and imagination. Most movies
>>I
>>am there, wherever the movie takes me. I kind of have to watch what I go
>>to
>>see because whatever I do see is happening all around me for two hours. A
>>good film grows stronger as I return to the real world. Weak films fall
>>apart. SPR dissolved by the time I got to the car, coming off a very
>>intense in-theater experience.
>
> That's great, actually. And, interestingly enough, it makes you a
> top-notch candidate for hypnosis. I'm somewhere in-between -- I
> disappear only partly into the film, more so if I'm in a theater than
> if I'm watching TV.
I'm not surprised. :)
> Weak films never engage me, or engage me only for brief stretches. As
> in your case, I find that the effect of strong films stays with me
> after I leave the theater. Some perhaps overly cerebral films affect
> me most strongly after the closing credits, e.g., some late Woody
> Allen films, which affect me as I process the moral dilemmas and
> symbolism.
I sometimes forget to do that. Some films I don't dare. :)
> Curiously, when I tried my hand at a science fiction novel a few years
> ago, I found that I disappeared entirely into the world I and my
> friendly neighborhood spider-subconscious were creating. It was like
> being immersed in an exciting novel, only more so.. Exhilirating.
I've found that in some RPG gaming as well. A really good game that I have
a really good character-groove going with, the character stays with me.
--
John Trauger,
Vorlonagent
"Methane martini.
Shaken, not stirred."
"Spirituality without science has no mind.
Science without spirituality has no heart."
-Methuselah Jones
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
* Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)
|