What TV are you watching and how would you rate it? [Revive from FRDB]

[Underseer]

Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes 5/10

Like most American TV cartoon superhero shows, it's pretty mediocre, but damn Marvel knows how to pluck my fanboy nostalgia strings. It's as if every obscure easter egg from the Marvel universe turns up somewhere in this show, and most of them give me a smile and fond memories of old comic books I read.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Nothing beats discussions between passionate trekkies. I love Star Trek because it's camp and silly. I think there's gold as well as crap all over Star Trek. All the series are very uneaven.

 

[KeepTalking]

One genre of sci-fi is known as 'space opera', and Babylon 5 fits comfortably within that genre. Really, the only thing keeping most Star Trek series' from being space opera is the lack of significant story arcs.

DS9 didn't have an arc? Voyager going home isn't much to be considered an arc.

DS9 was something of an exception for Star Trek in that it did utilize story arcs to an extent, but Babylon 5 was one continuous arc, and epitomizes space opera. I was, however, responding to JayJay who stated that he did not like the soap opera feel of DS9, and I was just noting that Star Trek in general comes very close to meeting the definition of space opera (a soap opera set in space), but most Star Trek series' do not embrace the defining space opera feature of continuous story arcs.

J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5 has maintained that Paramount actually stole the idea of DS9 from him, as he pitched the idea to them 5 years before either series premiered. He then pitched the show to WB, who announced the development of Babylon 5 a few months before Paramount announced DS9. Paramount did, however, premier DS9 a few months before Babylon 5 premiered, leading many Trekkies to conclude that Babylon 5 ripped off DS9.

And based on my rather neutral position, having loved DS9 when it came out and never even saw Babylon 5 for well over a decade (and see Seasons 2 through 4 beating out DS9 easily (only DS9's really good episodes compare), there is very little in common with the two shows and the idea it was stolen seems silly. The only thing in common is that they both take place on a stationary ship.

This article tackles some of the more recent evidence that supports Straczynski's story, but I think most fans of both series who know about the controversy do accept it as true:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/02/is-this-the-smoking-gun-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5

I was working at Warner Bros. in the publicity department when Warner Bros. and Paramount were preparing to launch a joint [emphasis mine] network. Warner Bros. already decided to buy Babylon 5 for their adhoc PTEN network (a group of independent stations that agreed to show Warner Bros. shows in prime time.)

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script. In fact, there was talk of leaving the B5 script in tact and just setting it the Star Trek universe. I had to keep rewriting press release drafts while they were trying to make the final decision.

But then, suddenly, Paramount decided to launch a new network on their own and screwed Warner Bros. over. That sent Warner Bros. scrambling to create their own network; grabbing up any station not already committed to Paramount and getting WGN to show the WB network on cable.

So Paramount definitely knew about the Babylon 5 script, I don’t know about the DS9 show runners, but I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.

Though Straczynski and WB never pursued any legal action, they likely would have had a fairly strong case.

 

[Underseer]

Babylon 5 introduced the concept of a series-wide story arc, so how can a series-wide story arc be a defining feature of space operas?

 

[ZiprHead]

Just watched the Monday episode of Top Gear last night (S22/E3). The guys create and test their ideas of "better" ambulances. My head hurt afterwards from laughing so much.

 

[Daioh]

Been watching through It Ain't Half Hot Mum
And it isn't bad, I think the second season is stronger then the first but I don't think it is one of the best shows I have watched
I'd give it a solid 6/10

Also tried Open All Hours (First Season), and it was okay-ish but never really kept me hugely interested
I'd give it a 5/10

 

[Ford]

You managed to list almost all the things that made me roll my eyes when watching DS9. Too much soap opera, too little scifi... watching it didn't feel like Star Trek, it felt like poor man's Babylon 5 set in a Star Trek universe. A Star Trek show doesn't really need a story arc or a timeline: TNG was best when it merely used the characters as vehicles to explore some neat concept, and then moved on.

DS9 was more about exploring the politics of the Star Trek universe, and for me that was the main appeal. Characters had to live with the consequences of their actions many episodes later, while most other Star Trek series had episodes that were entirely self-contained and you could watch the episodes in any order without really losing track of very much.

Count me as one of the fans of Deep Space Nine not having entirely self-contained episodes. It (along with B5) got away from this notion that everything in the story needs to be wrapped up by the end of the episode...something which (IMO) got to be a bit of a trope. No matter how much damage was caused, whether it was history being changed (which happened a lot in the Trek universe) or major characters being killed off ("he's dead, Jim") or the ship being flung halfway across the galaxy, everything was always wrapped up in the last act of the episode, and usually ended on a humorous quip. No harm, no foul, and for some reason nobody ever seemed changed by their experiences.


Perhaps the best example of the inability of Trek characters to be changed by their experience is Data. He starts the series as an android curious but also utterly clueless about human behavior. Yet after a couple decades of Next Generation shows and movies, in the last film (Nemesis) he's learned little or nothing about the humans he's been living with for most of his existence. It is still "captain, I am curious..."



That aside, I'm slogging through the second season of Orange is the New Black.

 

[KeepTalking]

Babylon 5 introduced the concept of a series-wide story arc, so how can a series-wide story arc be a defining feature of space operas?

Because the term was coined in the '40s in regard to radio plays, which were serialized and extensively used continuing story arcs.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

DS9 didn't have an arc? Voyager going home isn't much to be considered an arc.

DS9 was something of an exception for Star Trek in that it did utilize story arcs to an extent, but Babylon 5 was one continuous arc, and epitomizes space opera. I was, however, responding to JayJay who stated that he did not like the soap opera feel of DS9, and I was just noting that Star Trek in general comes very close to meeting the definition of space opera (a soap opera set in space), but most Star Trek series' do not embrace the defining space opera feature of continuous story arcs.

J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5 has maintained that Paramount actually stole the idea of DS9 from him, as he pitched the idea to them 5 years before either series premiered. He then pitched the show to WB, who announced the development of Babylon 5 a few months before Paramount announced DS9. Paramount did, however, premier DS9 a few months before Babylon 5 premiered, leading many Trekkies to conclude that Babylon 5 ripped off DS9.

And based on my rather neutral position, having loved DS9 when it came out and never even saw Babylon 5 for well over a decade (and see Seasons 2 through 4 beating out DS9 easily (only DS9's really good episodes compare), there is very little in common with the two shows and the idea it was stolen seems silly. The only thing in common is that they both take place on a stationary ship.

This article tackles some of the more recent evidence that supports Straczynski's story, but I think most fans of both series who know about the controversy do accept it as true:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/02/is...-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5

I was working at Warner Bros. in the publicity department when Warner Bros. and Paramount were preparing to launch a joint [emphasis mine] network. Warner Bros. already decided to buy Babylon 5 for their adhoc PTEN network (a group of independent stations that agreed to show Warner Bros. shows in prime time.)

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script. In fact, there was talk of leaving the B5 script in tact and just setting it the Star Trek universe. I had to keep rewriting press release drafts while they were trying to make the final decision.

But then, suddenly, Paramount decided to launch a new network on their own and screwed Warner Bros. over. That sent Warner Bros. scrambling to create their own network; grabbing up any station not already committed to Paramount and getting WGN to show the WB network on cable.

So Paramount definitely knew about the Babylon 5 script, I don’t know about the DS9 show runners, but I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.

Though Straczynski and WB never pursued any legal action, they likely would have had a fairly strong case.

But what other similarities are there other than space station and gambling... there is also gambling on both ships.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Babylon 5 introduced the concept of a series-wide story arc, so how can a series-wide story arc be a defining feature of space operas?

Because the term was coined in the '40s in regard to radio plays, which were serialized and extensively used continuing story arcs.

I think Underseer is referring to a predetermined series-wide story arc.

 

[KeepTalking]

DS9 was something of an exception for Star Trek in that it did utilize story arcs to an extent, but Babylon 5 was one continuous arc, and epitomizes space opera. I was, however, responding to JayJay who stated that he did not like the soap opera feel of DS9, and I was just noting that Star Trek in general comes very close to meeting the definition of space opera (a soap opera set in space), but most Star Trek series' do not embrace the defining space opera feature of continuous story arcs.

J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5 has maintained that Paramount actually stole the idea of DS9 from him, as he pitched the idea to them 5 years before either series premiered. He then pitched the show to WB, who announced the development of Babylon 5 a few months before Paramount announced DS9. Paramount did, however, premier DS9 a few months before Babylon 5 premiered, leading many Trekkies to conclude that Babylon 5 ripped off DS9.

And based on my rather neutral position, having loved DS9 when it came out and never even saw Babylon 5 for well over a decade (and see Seasons 2 through 4 beating out DS9 easily (only DS9's really good episodes compare), there is very little in common with the two shows and the idea it was stolen seems silly. The only thing in common is that they both take place on a stationary ship.

This article tackles some of the more recent evidence that supports Straczynski's story, but I think most fans of both series who know about the controversy do accept it as true:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/02/is...-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5

I was working at Warner Bros. in the publicity department when Warner Bros. and Paramount were preparing to launch a joint [emphasis mine] network. Warner Bros. already decided to buy Babylon 5 for their adhoc PTEN network (a group of independent stations that agreed to show Warner Bros. shows in prime time.)

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script. In fact, there was talk of leaving the B5 script in tact and just setting it the Star Trek universe. I had to keep rewriting press release drafts while they were trying to make the final decision.

But then, suddenly, Paramount decided to launch a new network on their own and screwed Warner Bros. over. That sent Warner Bros. scrambling to create their own network; grabbing up any station not already committed to Paramount and getting WGN to show the WB network on cable.

So Paramount definitely knew about the Babylon 5 script, I don’t know about the DS9 show runners, but I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.

Though Straczynski and WB never pursued any legal action, they likely would have had a fairly strong case.

But what other similarities are there other than space station and gambling... there is also gambling on both ships.

No one at Paramount denies that Straczynski pitched the series to them before he moved on to WB, who bought the series. It was more than just pitching an idea though, Straczynski gave them what he called the "Babylon 5 bible", which outlined the entire series arc and major characters. Other than the entire setting being the same, and the Star Trek universe not being known for story arcs previous to DS9, the original B5 pitch also involved a major character being a shapeshifter, and the security officer for DS9 was a shapeshifter. This was dropped from B5 before they went to production. Straczynski has said that he doubts the show runners were in on the ripoff, and the executives to whom he pitched the show likely just gave them a much less detailed outline of what Straczynski had pitched to them, and let them run with it.

- - - Updated - - -

Because the term was coined in the '40s in regard to radio plays, which were serialized and extensively used continuing story arcs.

I think Underseer is referring to a predetermined series-wide story arc.

I am not sure how this keeps B5 from being space opera, since the genre was in existence for 50 years before B5 aired. If you look up Babylon 5 on wikipedia, the very first thing it will tell you is that B5 is space opera.

 

[maginog]

Just watched the Monday episode of Top Gear last night (S22/E3). The guys create and test their ideas of "better" ambulances. My head hurt afterwards from laughing so much.

That was one of the funniest Top Gear episodes ever!

 

[TSwizzle]

Perhaps I am last person on the planet that hasn't seen Breaking Bad but I just started watching it on Netflix. I've only seen four episodes and I am hooked.

 

[gmbteach]

Perhaps I am last person on the planet that hasn't seen Breaking Bad but I just started watching it on Netflix. I've only seen four episodes and I am hooked.

I haven't seen it, so you aren't the last person to watch it. I am.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm 2 episodes into the show myself. Don't have Netflix right now, so really can't watch it.

 

[Draconis]

Now just finished plowing through the first two seasons of DS9. I do remember some of it, other episodes not. Good in parts, but I have this nagging feeling of wondering why I found this quite so engaging first time around 20 years ago. Perhaps I have watched too much else since then, with or without story arcs (I like story arcs). The soapy parts I have tried to avoid. I can see why they grate so much with traditional ST fans. A few episodes I skipped because I knew they were very crap: I'm not intending to watch "Meridian" again. Aside from that, not many really good episodes, and it is kind of tedious waiting for the "real enemy" to show up.

 

[credoconsolans]

Perhaps I am last person on the planet that hasn't seen Breaking Bad but I just started watching it on Netflix. I've only seen four episodes and I am hooked.

I haven't seen it, so you aren't the last person to watch it. I am.

I haven't seen it either, have no desire to see it, so I never will see it. So I will lay claim to the 'last person on the planet' title.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

Just watched the Monday episode of Top Gear last night (S22/E3). The guys create and test their ideas of "better" ambulances. My head hurt afterwards from laughing so much.

I had 5 minutes to watch it the other day and just chanced on the episode where a car does a mile there-and-back racing a plane doing a take-off plus vertical mile and back, without having to land. Gold!

Been watching through It Ain't Half Hot Mum
And it isn't bad, I think the second season is stronger then the first but I don't think it is one of the best shows I have watched
I'd give it a solid 6/10

Also tried Open All Hours (First Season), and it was okay-ish but never really kept me hugely interested
I'd give it a 5/10

I didn't watch these in their day but they suffer from being dated. Other shows that I was glued to 20-30 years ago just don't make the transition.

That reminds me, I suspect Grace Under Fire and Herman's Head would still be hilarious as are Yes Minister and the Vicar of Dibley..

 

[Underseer]

DS9 was something of an exception for Star Trek in that it did utilize story arcs to an extent, but Babylon 5 was one continuous arc, and epitomizes space opera. I was, however, responding to JayJay who stated that he did not like the soap opera feel of DS9, and I was just noting that Star Trek in general comes very close to meeting the definition of space opera (a soap opera set in space), but most Star Trek series' do not embrace the defining space opera feature of continuous story arcs.

J. Michael Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5 has maintained that Paramount actually stole the idea of DS9 from him, as he pitched the idea to them 5 years before either series premiered. He then pitched the show to WB, who announced the development of Babylon 5 a few months before Paramount announced DS9. Paramount did, however, premier DS9 a few months before Babylon 5 premiered, leading many Trekkies to conclude that Babylon 5 ripped off DS9.

And based on my rather neutral position, having loved DS9 when it came out and never even saw Babylon 5 for well over a decade (and see Seasons 2 through 4 beating out DS9 easily (only DS9's really good episodes compare), there is very little in common with the two shows and the idea it was stolen seems silly. The only thing in common is that they both take place on a stationary ship.

This article tackles some of the more recent evidence that supports Straczynski's story, but I think most fans of both series who know about the controversy do accept it as true:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2013/02/is...-proving-deep-space-nine-ripped-off-babylon-5

I was working at Warner Bros. in the publicity department when Warner Bros. and Paramount were preparing to launch a joint [emphasis mine] network. Warner Bros. already decided to buy Babylon 5 for their adhoc PTEN network (a group of independent stations that agreed to show Warner Bros. shows in prime time.)

Paramount and Warner Bros. both agreed that Deepspace 9 would be the show that would launch the new network and there wouldn’t be room for two “space” shows on the network. I was told they purposely took what they liked from the B5 script and put it in the DS9 script. In fact, there was talk of leaving the B5 script in tact and just setting it the Star Trek universe. I had to keep rewriting press release drafts while they were trying to make the final decision.

But then, suddenly, Paramount decided to launch a new network on their own and screwed Warner Bros. over. That sent Warner Bros. scrambling to create their own network; grabbing up any station not already committed to Paramount and getting WGN to show the WB network on cable.

So Paramount definitely knew about the Babylon 5 script, I don’t know about the DS9 show runners, but I find it hard to believe they didn’t know.

Though Straczynski and WB never pursued any legal action, they likely would have had a fairly strong case.

But what other similarities are there other than space station and gambling... there is also gambling on both ships.

No one at Paramount denies that Straczynski pitched the series to them before he moved on to WB, who bought the series. It was more than just pitching an idea though, Straczynski gave them what he called the "Babylon 5 bible", which outlined the entire series arc and major characters. Other than the entire setting being the same, and the Star Trek universe not being known for story arcs previous to DS9, the original B5 pitch also involved a major character being a shapeshifter, and the security officer for DS9 was a shapeshifter. This was dropped from B5 before they went to production. Straczynski has said that he doubts the show runners were in on the ripoff, and the executives to whom he pitched the show likely just gave them a much less detailed outline of what Straczynski had pitched to them, and let them run with it.

- - - Updated - - -

Because the term was coined in the '40s in regard to radio plays, which were serialized and extensively used continuing story arcs.

I think Underseer is referring to a predetermined series-wide story arc.

I am not sure how this keeps B5 from being space opera, since the genre was in existence for 50 years before B5 aired. If you look up Babylon 5 on wikipedia, the very first thing it will tell you is that B5 is space opera.

All I know is that when B5 first aired, everyone remarked that what made it different was the planned story arcs.

Space operas do not necessarily have to have planned story arcs to count as space operas. It simply isn't part of the definition of a space opera, at least as far as I know.

 

[Ford]

All I know is that when B5 first aired, everyone remarked that what made it different was the planned story arcs.

Space operas do not necessarily have to have planned story arcs to count as space operas. It simply isn't part of the definition of a space opera, at least as far as I know.

I'm frankly at a loss as to why labeling Babylon 5 as a space opera is so important. Whatever you call it, B5 was a pretty good show. All this talk makes me want to watch it again, but it is not streaming on Netflix or Amazon Prime.