Babylon 5 Lost Tales reviews needed

[Shabaz]

Just sort the reviews on amazon.co.uk on helpfulness. I thought the review that comes out on top for both the version with and the version without the art cards is pretty decent.

(Since I kind of am the person that wrote it. Kind of nice to see people liked that write-up though.)

[Joe Nazzaro]

Vintari, believe me, I would love to be proved wrong!

[princevintari]

I would actually like to post another 5-star review there now that I've seen it, but I think I'm only allowed to post one.

But those two reviews you cite and the others in the same vein really annoy me. Knocking B5 for being low-budget seems a bit like knocking gold for being yellow..

Not that it seems to have mattered. People aren't being deterred from buying it, it seems.

you can post on 3 B5 TLT DVDs. With art cards, without, & R1

Ironically, this all comes back full circle to the topic at hand, because it's obvious there are a lot of fans out there willing to pay money for more B5. Warners, while they believe that to be true, was unwilling to put a lot of their own money on the line, which means the first DVD had to be done on relatively modest budget. Does that mean future DVDs would be done for a bigger budget? Again, the cynical part of believes not, although I would love to be proved wrong. But if the powers-that-be can look at a balance sheet and say if they spent X money and made Y profit, it would make sense to spend the same amount of money next time around, rather than saying, let's spend X plus whatever.

Joe you will be proved wrong because JMS has stated that he won't make any more Lost Tales unless there's a suitable budget to make each one better. Mind you I would have thought given all the CGI work done for this one it would bring down the costs for the next, meaning they should be able to make it bigger for the same money... Right?

[raw_bean]

Ironically, this all comes back full circle to the topic at hand, because it's obvious there are a lot of fans out there willing to pay money for more B5. Warners, while they believe that to be true, was unwilling to put a lot of their own money on the line, which means the first DVD had to be done on relatively modest budget. Does that mean future DVDs would be done for a bigger budget? Again, the cynical part of believes not, although I would love to be proved wrong. But if the powers-that-be can look at a balance sheet and say if they spent X money and made Y profit, it would make sense to spend the same amount of money next time around, rather than saying, let's spend X plus whatever.

Let us hope that the fact that the one constant through all reviews and opinions on TLT, positive and negative, is that the show was too cheap and small scale might convince them that spending X plus some more will get them Y plus even more.

[AmyG]

The other thing to remember is that the film/tv industry is trying very hard not to be the dying dinosaur that the music industry has become. So they're at least making attempts to try a few new things -- witness all of the major networks' streaming video delivery systems, and the ability to watch their programming for free, whenever you like -- and I think they're spending money like never before on some of those things...which makes them reflexively defensive about spending money on certain other things. Like, the things they've been historically afraid of. Like...sf programming of any kind. So, sure, WB will make an attempt to re-start an old sf television series in a direct-to-dvd format, but you can hear them scream every time a penny is let out of their wallets. :-p

[Joe Nazzaro]

Jan, I wonder in hindsight if there were other factors that caused things to go downhill. The really cynical part of me believes that once sums of money get involved, they change people who may have had good intentions. SF fandom as a group has always had very deep pockets, and during the heyday of B5 fandom, I get the feeling there were lots of people who were willing to spend money as it pertained to their favorite show, be it books, autographs, conventions; whatever. And looking back on some of the previous posts, when you work your way backwards, most of them seemed to involve money in one way or another.

Ironically, this all comes back full circle to the topic at hand, because it's obvious there are a lot of fans out there willing to pay money for more B5. Warners, while they believe that to be true, was unwilling to put a lot of their own money on the line, which means the first DVD had to be done on relatively modest budget. Does that mean future DVDs would be done for a bigger budget? Again, the cynical part of believes not, although I would love to be proved wrong. But if the powers-that-be can look at a balance sheet and say if they spent X money and made Y profit, it would make sense to spend the same amount of money next time around, rather than saying, let's spend X plus whatever.

[RMcD]

I was just browsing Amazon UK and took a look at the Babylon 5 Lost Tales page (without art cards ) and found the following "reviews" right up to the top. I've knocked them down the page a little with my review but if others could follow suit it certainly couldn't harm the cause. Better some well-rounded comments rather than bogus or inaccurate "reviews".

I would actually like to post another 5-star review there now that I've seen it, but I think I'm only allowed to post one.

But those two reviews you cite and the others in the same vein really annoy me. Knocking B5 for being low-budget seems a bit like knocking gold for being yellow..

Not that it seems to have mattered. People aren't being deterred from buying it, it seems.

[Jan]

Oh dear, it all comes flooding back now. IÆm afraid I have to accept a bit of blame in this situation, because I was actually responsible for putting said organizer in touch with his first couple of B5 guests for the very early events, which I suppose in retrospect gave him the impetus to continue.

No way you could have known, Joe. Heck, even JMS endorsed the guy and the conventions at first.

Jan

[nova]

It's unfortunate, but a negative review is still a legitimate viewpoint. The only inaccurate thing in them is that there was no old footage used. Couldn't be-the CG files were lost by WB.

The unfortunate thing is that so many people simply can't wrap their brains around the different format and tone. Not much we can really do to change that, I'm afraid. By all means, if you liked the disk, do post a review, though.

Jan

I agree. The dvd was good for what it was. I guess it's also tough sometimes to look at a creation like this when you know the creator is capable of a lot more. By that I mean capable of more within this new format as well as the old stuff. I do notice a lot of the really disgruntled and disappointed folks mellow a bit when you remind them that this Lost Tales series is (once again for B5) breaking new ground and thus will not only have an impact on the future of this B5 universe but also for other shows that have been off the air for a while and future shows as well. Star Trek may have made the line famous but JMS seems to have made a career out of going where no man has gone before...

[Capt.Montoya]

It's unfortunate, but a negative review is still a legitimate viewpoint. The only inaccurate thing in them is that there was no old footage used. Couldn't be-the CG files were lost by WB.

To be completely accurate... even if WB had not lost the CG files (software backups of the computer graphics models) and those CG files were used to render new animations, no footage would have been re-used.

And apparently they did get access to some old files, in addition to files created independently by B5 fans for their own renderings, according to the CG Society piece on TLT VFX. However those 3D computer models had to be re-done for higher resolution rendering.

Nit-picks aside:
I agree that negative reviews are legitimate viewpoints. In any event what I tend to do is not to pad the positive review count. I prefer to mark as helpful any balanced review I agree with. After all even reviews that are mostly positive but mark legitimate criticisms should be more helpful than "fanboy" raves that do not seem sincere.

[Joe Nazzaro]

Oh dear, it all comes flooding back now. IÆm afraid I have to accept a bit of blame in this situation, because I was actually responsible for putting said organizer in touch with his first couple of B5 guests for the very early events, which I suppose in retrospect gave him the impetus to continue. In my defense, the only reasons I did it was A) it basically gave some of the B5 people a free trip to the UK, and B) I thought it would help promote the series, which at the time was getting more attention on the other side of the pond. In hindsight, maybe not the brightest thing I ever did, in light of everything that happened afterwards.

[Jan]

Here's a post from the moderated newsgroup that explains it in fair detail:

The awards were given by the *readers* of SFX. Not the magazine itself.

As for the rest, as usual, it's a lot more complicated than that. My
understanding of it is this (if anyone knows differently, or knows more,
please feel free to correct any misunderstanding on my part) :

The "problem" actually stems from a certain con organiser - part (and only
*part*) of the Wolf organisation. Way back when B5 was young, said
organiser started importing US taped copies of B5 episodes and started
showing them at public meetings. This is illegal here in the UK for both
copyright and certification reasons, and quiet words were had between the
B5 production office and this individual, who basically said he's stop the
practice.

He didn't. He carried on, just tried to be more sneaky about it. Since he's
not the sharpest pencil in the drawer, he failed miserably in his attempts
at subterfuge, and was taken to task once again, and issued assurances that
it wouldn't happen again. This is the reason Warner's despatches F.A.C.T.
people to conventions in the UK to make sure no Warner's stuff is shown.
Say thanks to this guy anyone who's ever been disapointed that there's no
B5 or Crusade shown at B5 cons over here.

Then came the first of the Blackpool cons, and questions arose concerning
the ultimate destination of money donated for charity. Assurances were
given that all was above board, and there were no issues. Stars were
photographed handing over cheques to Great Ormond Street children's
hospital etc. and all seemed well.

Another Blackpool con was set up, and the organisers promised that the
accounts would be made available at the end of the con to JMS and other
guests. Once again, questions arose over the charity auction funds. JMS and
others asked to see the promised accounts, which were not (and never have
been) forthcoming. This was the con where the Claudia Christian bombshell
hit, and JMS' notes for a lot of season 5 were destroyed by the hotel he
was staying at, so he understandably wasn't in the best of moods for
dealing with corruption issues.

Then came the Warner Bros. debacle over the public showing of "In The
Beginning" at the Warner's West End cinema. Warner's in their infinite
wisdom decided to use the Wolf organisation to contact fans who might want
to attend this event, which was a promotion for the forthcoming UK video
release of the TV movie. Unfortunately, it was decided to charge for the
tickets, which is against all sorts of US Actors Guild rules ("cinematic
presentation" or somesuch). So once again, Wolf is in the middle of a
controversy concerning cash and its ultimate destination. JMS stepped in,
and as a direct result of his intervention, fans were given refunds and the
event became what it was always supposed to be - a free one as a "thank
you" to the UK fans for their long-time support of the show.

Then comes the VOR con in the States, run by the same organiser, but
totally independent of Wolf. The budgeted 5,000 attendees turned out to be
around 1,500 for a wide variety of reasons - location and cost being the
main two. Given that the majority of the B5 cast were attending, the end
result was that some 90% of the speakers ended up either not getting paid
in full, or not getting paid at all. Nothing. Zip. In short, because of the
ineptitude of the organisers of VOR, most of the B5 cast were not paid what
they'd been promised. Quite why this failure was *their* fault, I have
never understood. As is his wont, JMS spoke up for the short-changed
actors, and was vociferous in his demands that they be paid what they'd
been promised.

Now in the middle of all of this, sits SFX magazine. Run by people who are
also not the sharpest pencils in the drawer, and who get taken in hook line
and sinker by the organiser's line that he's being victimised by these
nasty people (JMS in particular, but also the UK B5 group) and how unfair
it all is. They start to use this organiser and his lackeys as their main
story feed for B5 and JMS items. As a consequence, accuracy falls straight
through the floor, as does SFX's small remaining credibility with B5 fans.

SFX despatches an "independent journalist" to uncover the fuss over the In
The Beginning showing, and produces an article that manages to slate JMS
and the UK group without actually having dug *too* hard into the underlying
bad feeling. That a rabid defence of the organiser was posted to the UK
newsgroup a few months afterwards from the same PC used by the journalist
rather laid low any claim to impartiality from that quarter. She has denied
posting the message, but the computer's IP address is fixed, so it must
have been someone else using her PC then.

Around this point in time, the B5 production office decide they've had
enough of the stuff put out by SFX, and cut them off from any and all
communication. No press releases, promotional material, set visits, photos,
nothing. SFX comes to rely more and more on their "unofficial" sources of
information with an additional drop in quality.

SFX have never got over the fact that it seems to have been easy for the B5
production office to "cut them off", and this has coloured their reporting
ever since - despite the fact that they now seem to have severed their own
relationship with the con organiser. I don't know why they've done this. I
am curious, however!

I *think* this covers most of the events, in roughly the right order. I
have deliberately missed a few items out that are not directly relevant to
the JMS / SFX debate, but this is the broad overview from my perspective.

As I said at the top - feel free to correct any mistakes or omissions I've
made here.

Cheers,

Paul.

(c) Paul Harper 1999 - This article may not be reproduced in any form
without the author's permission. Permission is granted to the "JMS Digest"
organisation.

Jan

[vacantlook]

I tried searching some, and while I haven't really come up with anything yet that really tells the tale, some of jms's comments regarding SFX are hillarious.

link one

...SFX is a fairly useless publication on just
about every imaginable front. Never have so many jumped-up fanboys done so
little, with so much, for so long.

link two

...>> synthetic worlds, ltd., permission
>> to reprint specifically denied to
>> SFX Magazine)
>
>Nice touch, but you know they'll only make something up, don't you?
>

And that would be different...how...?

link three

>they go on to say "SFX is the only SF magazine not afraid to say what it
>thinks"

If that were actually true, then the magazine would consist mainly of blank
pages.

link four

>Understandable, since it crashed & burned in the US market; though
>I'd have thought you might at least have seen the review column I
>used to write for SFX...

Takes a lot for a man to come out and admit he wrote pornography....

link five

>Then on the back page in the smallest of small type they suggest "a
>course in British Sign language for JMS".

Perhaps while they're recommending classes they could try taking Journalism 101
to learn how real journalists work.

[Shr'eshhhhhh]

I think it goes back to the early days of the TNT/Crusade bing bong.

SFX published material that JMS objected to in the strongest terms and he denied them access to his words again.

Which is sad because SFX was behind the show when other magazines were looking the other way and whistling a tune by Jerry Goldsmith.

[Joe Nazzaro]

You recall correctly, but I'll be damned if I can remember the whole story after all this time. I do remember the SFX Awards in Blackpool, where JMS got the hall of fame award, which was presented to him by Blake's 7's Gareth Thomas, the only time I ever saw him at a loss for words. I also remember having to smuggle Gareth up to our hotel room and keeping out of public view so as not to blow the surprise, while my wife had to recreate his B7 makeup for the awards. What a surreal afternoon.