"the legend of the rangers"

[Night Marshal]

my barber is Johnny Cochran, he came back from the dead gave up law and started cutting hair

[AmyG]

People also seem to be entertained when I tell them I've been shopping in King of Prussia.

[frulad]

Have you ever been to Bird in Hand, PA?

How proud I am to be a resident of a state with such town names as Bird-In-Hand, Intercourse, Virginville and Blue Ball...

[Laiden]

the thing was, I had this overall feeling with the movie. I knew to me, it doesnt feel like what babylon 5 Shows usually feel. My problem was that I didnt know WHY or WHAT made me not like it. I found that the visual inconsistencies with Minbar and their Ship, was a small factor, but I soon realized that the writing and other things just gave me my opinion. I watch Crusade, and it feels and looks much like Babylon 5. This show just seemed less like B5 . . . I just didnt know how. I do appologize for going overboard on such little details. but with Jan's thread about B5 original Pilot on AOL tv, made my day really great!

[AmyG]

True, no ONE structure can be Completely the same . . . but this in comparison is going from a triangle like, geometric structure and design to something that looks like it came out of Lord of the Rings (ironic eh? I'm sure it was their intention)

B5 series Minbar
LotR Minbar

Laiden, I know we've been asked to table this, but I had to respond to this particularly before shutting up. Here's my reply:

Trump Tower
yurt

Yet, both are on Earth! How inconsistent!

As for "bitching," I didn't mean anything disparaging by it. When I complain about something in a show, it's bitching, too. Or more often, bitching and moaning. The two seem to go together. But not all bitching is created equal, is what I was trying to say!

I think the basic problem is that when you are unhappy with something for the _big_ reasons (as some people were unhappy with certain aspects of how Rangers was written), it's more likely you're going to also find the nitpicky things not to your liking, either.

[Laiden]

no arguments there. It doesnt help the fact that I'm not too fond of this movie, but to NOT give it the treatment that the other DVD releases recieved is pretty sad on WHV part.

Oh well . . . I have it, thats all I wanted

EDIT: I'll look into the video differences . . . I'll post some Screen Caps either in an edit or a new post later today

EDIT TO THE EDIT: here are some links to the aspect ratio and the grainy-ness

Original on the left, DVD on the Right. the aspect was the same for all shots, FX and original.
Aspect Ratio Norm

Here shows the grain in the video and the aspect for FX shots . . . but you can see the grain more on a normal TV than on the computer.
grainy image/Aspect FX

[OmahaStar]

While I'm happy they've finally released the movie on dvd, I feel they totally fucked it up.

1 - The sound ... As has been mentioned, everything til now has been 5.1... Why switch now?

2 - Picture quality is VERY grainy. I specifically am talking about the scenes where David and the whats-his-name "ambassador for the hand" dude are fighting, as he's trying to go out an escape pod. It's supposed to be dark blues and shadowy, but it's so grainy and blotchy there, it's like a 15th generation video. Horrible.

3 - Now, another picture issue is the so-called "matting" they did. They just butchered this, as they did with the so-called "widescreen presentation of The Gathering" ... Instead of being shown in widescreen, as it was filmed, they took the existing video and just cut the tops and bottoms off.

In the B5 episodes with fx, they do a blowup of the screen, very close up, so they can cut off the top and bottom to make it widescreen. Here, they do it for the entire movie. I compared it with my videotape from the scifi airing, and confirmed they fucked it up.

4 - No extras. At all. Not even the French language track like we get on every other release. Just the movie, and nothing else... And they mark it at 20 bucks? Yeah, I'm sure we've all gotten it for a discounted price somewhere, but still, it felt like they put it out as an afterthought, and didn't give it a chance. At all.

So, to sum it up, I'm glad it's out, but I wish they'd given it even the most basic effort.

[Laiden]

Dead horse, meet stick.

Jan

[Jan]

Okay, enough posters have addressed the Minbar comment with the same answer, albeit worded differently.

Dead horse, meet stick.

Jan

[Laiden]

No matter how anyone wants to explain it away, it doesnt feel or look like Minbar to me. JMS has always seemed to depict each alien enviroment in a certain way. look at the Ambassador rooms throughout the series. every world looked a certain way. how do we know where Lenon from "In the Beginning" was in the same part of the world as we saw in the series too? we dont. but at least the world was consistantly similar with how we have seen it and how it has been described.

this isnt the "bitching" of a crushed fan, this is just one of the SMALL continuities that made this movie feel less like Babylon 5. I am done trying to explain it . . . it looks different, you can't argue that. Thats why I didnt like it. it didnt make me stop watching the movie, but it was one little thing that I didnt care for.

as Z'ha'dumDweller said, the post has been addressed . . . I'm done.

[Dr Maturin]

Okay, enough posters have addressed the Minbar comment with the same answer, albeit worded differently.

[vacantlook]

the design looks nothing like any place on the minbari homeworld . . .

How many places on Minbar did we actually get to see the exteriors of throughout the series? Exceptionally few. Planets are significantly bigger than two or three matte paintings.

[Laiden]

Have you ever been to Bird in Hand, PA? It doesn't look anything like Manhattan. Which doesn't look anything like Santa Fe. Which doesn't look anything like Wellfleet, MA. Etc. Why is there no sand in Manhattan? Why is there no grass (to speak of) in the desert? The shore at the Canaveral National Seashore in Florida looks so different from the shore at Mt. Desert Island in Maine that you might as well be in different countries, or even different planets.

So, you've never seen the industrial side of Minbar. Bitching about the writing is one thing; bitching about fannish expectations having been crushed is quite another. I'm just sayin'....!

True, no ONE structure can be Completely the same . . . but this in comparison is going from a triangle like, geometric structure and design to something that looks like it came out of Lord of the Rings (ironic eh? I'm sure it was their intention)

B5 series Minbar
LotR Minbar

Amy. I dont think "bitching" is an appropriate word . . . nor is "fannish expectations" I didnt EXPECT anything but continuity. as I stated before, this just didnt FEEL like what I had been watching for the last 9 years (taking into account 'Rangers' came out in 2002). and yes, I felt the writing didnt seem up-to-par with everything else Babylon 5 . . . but that could be because he was going for a script where EVERYONE would watch and understand it. Either way, It doesnt peak my interest enough to wonder what would happen if it became a series.

Jan, no hard feelings eh? I do appologize for being defensive. I didnt really want to defend my views . . . was kind of hoping most people would go and move on . . . or make a joke like Z'ha'dumDweller did . It's how I saw the movie when it first aired, and its how I feel now after just watching it. you are right, whats a discussion without views.

In summary . . . Legend of the Rangers while doning the "Babylon 5" name, wasnt what I was used to in terms of writing and appearance. This felt more like an Action hour of Gene Rodenberry's Andromeda than a true episode of Babylon 5. Maybe that's what they were going for, but clearly this show had other problems than a football game and conflicting ratings. Like I said as many times as the Rangers said "we live for the one" this still sits with my Babylon 5 DVD collection as my avatar shows and I will watch it in order with the rest of my DVDs.

[AmyG]

As for the "part of the planet" as we shall call it. again, the design looks nothing like any place on the minbari homeworld . . . I thought about how this could be a completely different place on the planet and the design just still isnt like what we have seen before and it just didnt feel like Minbar. And BTW Jan, there werent crystaline deposits in this city, it was cold metal and lights everywhere.

Have you ever been to Bird in Hand, PA? It doesn't look anything like Manhattan. Which doesn't look anything like Santa Fe. Which doesn't look anything like Wellfleet, MA. Etc. Why is there no sand in Manhattan? Why is there no grass (to speak of) in the desert? The shore at the Canaveral National Seashore in Florida looks so different from the shore at Mt. Desert Island in Maine that you might as well be in different countries, or even different planets.

So, you've never seen the industrial side of Minbar. Bitching about the writing is one thing; bitching about fannish expectations having been crushed is quite another. I'm just sayin'....!

[Jan]

I am not comparing the Liandra to the white star. why would I do that?

I didn't make myself clear, I apologize. What I was responding to was your issue with how the ships didn't seem to be depicted as being as large as you thought they should be. My point was that the Liandra wasn't supposed to be very large at all.

As for the "part of the planet" as we shall call it. again, the design looks nothing like any place on the minbari homeworld . . . I thought about how this could be a completely different place on the planet and the design just still isnt like what we have seen before and it just didnt feel like Minbar. And BTW Jan, there werent crystaline deposits in this city, it was cold metal and lights everywhere.

I do need to see it again but I didn't think we actually saw city, just the area around the spaceport. Part of my point, though, was that we were never shown any part of the Minbari homeworld that I can recall except the one city and the temple where the Starfire Wheel was (which didn't look like the other area of the city we'd seen, either). So how can we know what it looks like, really? Same with Centauri Prime and we saw even less of the Narn homeworld.

I know people like this movie. I understand people think this had promise. I can see why you would want to defend it, but what I state is a mere opinion (or didnt you see the IMO in my last post) and if my views sound like I didnt take the time to explain it away and made me look like a fool, so be it. But aside from aesthetics, l still found the writing in this movie to be poor and maybe "dumbed down". repetition in lines, and ideas (not just the "we live" line) make us feel like we dont remember what they said 10 minutes ago . . . I was uninterested 30 minutes into the movie and that is just how I am, if no one else feels this way about it fine, but there is no sense in fighting over the points I make. I was simply stating what I felt when watching the movie, it didnt "feel" like Babylon 5 or Crusade. This didnt "feel" like the writing I have known JMS to produce. That is simply the way I feel about this movie.

That's fine, and nobody disputes that at all. But this is a discussion and that wouldn't be any fun without different views, would it? If it sounded like I was denigrating your opinions, again, I apologize. I just simply was pointing out things you might not have thought about. All too often, and I'm not saying that this case is one of them, people seem to think that they have to have reasons for not liking something instead of it simply not being to their taste. Different people don't like things for different reasons. One fan I know hated the movie seemingly just because hyperspace looks different. While I can see that that might be a shock at first, I never understood how it could ruin the entire experience. Diff'rent strokes, as they say.

Jan