posted
That's the good thing about the Lurker's Guide - it filters out all the crap and just includes any useful info about any specific episode. That way you avoid the endless self-promotion (on his part) and the sickening toadying (on the part of the regulars who provide the 'moderated' part of the group).
posted
And you miss out on the anti-SFX (magazine) stuff.
How dare they not like season 5? Or Crusade? They are worse than a super baby-eating Hitler!
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, yeah, forgot about the SFX thing. I've long since stopped reading the mag, and am aware of its flaws - since it became a Teenybopper SF fanzine about 4 years ago - but all the same from what I know of that diagreement it seems like JMS is being way too petulant.
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Admission: JMS's interviews and Usenet postings give me the creeps.
But: Surely part of any creative endeavor is a belief, on behalf of the creator, that the endeavor is worthwhile? I'm not sure that in itself is enough to qualify as being full of one's self.
Yes but to go around and saying that he's the saviour of Star Trek (when I think it's done quiet a nice job in Season 3 ent) is just smacking of his own self-importance.
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
Okay, people who sign message board posts are bad enough (I am capable of moving my eyes an inch upwards and to the left to see who has posted), but to leave three return carriages before signing off?
Crazy mad people who talk to cupboards make more sense.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Side-stepping the issue of whether JMS working as an EP on Enterprise would be a good thing.
Its just odd comparing this thread to a stereotypical thread on say Star Wars. There, you have a long running successful franchise that is continuing to make loads of money, yet its almost a universal given fact (among "fans") that they should replace George Lucas and create something more grown-up, more risky. Tangentially, you have shows like Futurama that are cancelled simply because they are too off-the-wall and creatively strange for network executives to "get".
Now, here we have TPTB being forced to cut the price of Enterprise in half to keep it on the air and having the foresight to change the show runner to Manny Coto in the hopes that we'll get better television. They also go and see what writers might be interested in an EP position to shake things up, and what do we get?
"Enterprise is already pretty good, continue as you were, running out of viewers and ratings. Its too risky to change now, and the current writers are already good enough. All those threads complaining about how B&B aren't good enough, don't mind them, we were just kidding."
Sometimes, just sometimes I actually feel sorry for network executives. Then I get a drink.
In any case, JMS declined the position so this all seems like a storm in a teacup. Your beloved Trek is perfectly safe. There is no need to question the credentials that were evidentally good enough for even the people that are in charge of ST.
Also, what *was* he supposed to post?
quote: No, just to clarify, though I got a call last year about coming onto Enterprise, offering an EP position, and declined...As for Manny, he's a horrible writer, and left to his own devices, I'm sure he'll wreck the show, interference from other powers or not.
Depressingly enough, on the Trek front, Bryce Zabel (the self-admitted creator of that crummy show Dark Skies) and I got together and wrote a treatment earlier this year that specified how to run ST into the ground faster, so that no attempt could ever be made to resurrect it. I actually think it would be pretty horrible. Why am I telling you all of this again?
not-jms
In the end, while his posts may be self-promotional (sp.), at least they're more informative and interesting than the public newsgroup messages that Brannon and Berman have posted.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: Okay, people who sign message board posts are bad enough (I am capable of moving my eyes an inch upwards and to the left to see who has posted), but to leave three return carriages before signing off?
Do you have to pay some kind of ASCII tax, or are you gunning for the petty snit of the year award? Take a valium or something, kid.
Credentials. (And I still can't think of a motive for lying about being offered a position)
quote:Originally posted by Mark Nguyen: Yep.
Besides, jms has had exactly ONE hit, and even that was questionable. B5 never got huge ratings, and I highly doubt they'd call him in. Crusade and Rangers bombed, and Jeremiah's gone too; while all this is not necesarily his fault, it's still not a great track record.
Self-promotion:
quote:Originally posted by Lee: That's the good thing about the Lurker's Guide - it filters out all the crap and just includes any useful info about any specific episode. That way you avoid the endless self-promotion (on his part) and the sickening toadying (on the part of the regulars who provide the 'moderated' part of the group).
Star Trek is good enough right now:
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Yes but to go around and saying that he's the saviour of Star Trek (when I think it's done quiet a nice job in Season 3 ent) is just smacking of his own self-importance.
And I really hope that I don't have to dig up threads where people have complained about B&B....it would take too much of my time
In any case, I'm just observing the irony. Fans (and network executives I guess) are a funny bunch.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Seems like a pretty weak irony to me. Lee, as far as I know, is one of the more enthusiastic Babylon 5 fans on Flare. His, and my, comments were directed towards JMS as a correspondant, not as a screenwriter.
No individual poster has made all three of those claims. Like, personally, I think JMS is an overrated writer, and I am, frankly, more or less pleased with Enterprise.
And anyway, what's the big deal? Is it not the case that, post-B5, JMS has had trouble getting anything other than a comic book off the ground? (Not that I'm slighting comic books by any means.) Couldn't someone believe both that Enterprise needs something new and that JMS isn't the person to provide it, for whatever reason?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
"If JMS does end up working on Trek, for fuck's sake, don't let him write any dialogue."
I'm talking about fans in general, not in specific. But I don't think I have to stretch to find complaints about screenwriting, rather than correspondence.
The thing is, whether JMS is overrated or not, thats your opinion. If you're pleased with Enterprise well, thats your opinion. I'm definitely not pleased with Enterprise, and thats my opinion. The fact that Enterprise has problems isn't an opinion, even the network executives apparantly see it, and thats saying something. So JMS may or may not be the right solution for ST, I already said I was going to sidestep that argument. But its hard to not see that something has to be done in general.
If they've decided that they have to look around for new talent, I'm all for it.
In any case, sure, JMS's record for starting new series isn't stellar. But to be honest, no one in this genre seems to be doing all that hot anyways. In the last ten years, we've seen many a failed series and the only thing that has lasted would be...Stargate SG1? One long-lived competitor out of many (Firefly, Angel, Farscape, X-Files, Harsh Realm, Sliders, EFC, Andromeda(? not sure), Outer Limits, New Twilight Zone, The Matrix, etc.) Oooh, I guess there's George Lucas, now there's a thought.
But seriously, if we limit ourselves to science fiction writers that have launched successful science fiction franchises, its a pretty short list and one would wonder why they don't just work on their own creations.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Hercules and Xena lasted a respectable number of years. Whether two fantasy shows should be lumped in with your list, though, I can't say. The X-Files can be considered a success: it's just the attempt to extnd it way beyond its natural life, as well as Carter's inability to repeat the success even after three attempts, that can be counted as failures.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
