They won't. I have seen many people in their 30's cringe when we older folk began talking about the original ST. Now TNG - that is a different matter (to them)!

I could not cast a replacement for Gkar - but there are professionals who can do this. Sometimes. One could hope.

Jan

Scarecrow (Bruce Boxleitner)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085088/

G'Kar is a heroes hero. I would vote for G'Kar, but of course, G'Kar would never run ;^)

The acting (or possibly the characters and acting) in STNG by Diana Troi, Will Riker, Welsey Crusher was putrid. As UFOP emperor, I would have spaced the lot of them along with Picard, and poisoned Q. There were decent performances by some others, but the same can be said of the STOS cast (without the constant statist themes and politically correct rubbish.)

I agree that the reboot modern ST is empty-headed boomboom movie making. Entertaining at a basic level, but rubbish otherwise. You hit the nail on the head; it's not rational.

If recasting and rewriting with JMS in complete control and a limitless budget, then B5 as a whole 'might' be improved. There were episodes that definitely needed work, and they could be improved. But like a Constitutional Convention, there are no guarantees that Whorelywould might interfere.

If I was wealthy, I'd make The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress instead of recasting B5, and the aftermarket products would drive the CIA and NSA crazy.

Your quote (in another reply in this topic) is the centerpiece of B5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhIzBy9f...

And congrats to Kris... who's noticed

http://www.newsobserver.com/entertainmen...

?

I am a complete B5 fanatic and I would love to see a reboot. That being said, I don't know without actors like Andreas Katsulas and Peter Jurasik (also Stephen Furst and Mira Furlan), it would have the same soul as the original series did.

How is it that people won't watch B5 because it has outdated SFX but they will watch the Original Star Trek until the crack of doom?

BradA -

The purpose in a reboot would be to get B5 on the screen again with new CGI and a smoother plot arc. The reason to choose B5 is _because_ its superb quality would be worth the effort - but few new people will watch the old series because of its dated Fx.

The purpose behind this is not just to gratify the fans, but to enhance the trend promoted by "CA: Winter Soldier" to heighten awareness of freedom and the costs of freedom. B5 is an excellent vehicle for this purpose because you do not have to 'warp' it (forgive me the pun) to make it have that message - the message is inherent in the plot arc.

In short: B5 is not a viable production as it is because it is 'dated'. It would be worthwhile to reboot it - and you can establish an economic value to doing so because (like comic book movies) it has an established fan base. It has a message we want to promote.

Jan

OK, I am a huge B5 fan and IMO it is the best series ever created for the small screen. Bar none. With that said, I see no point in a reboot.

JMS' work is a masterpiece, flaws and all. The series was way ahead of its time. Killing off major characters (GoT), a fixed arc with a beginning middle and end (BB), 3 dimensional characters with real flaws that did impact the story line (any number of current series), cutting edge CGI (at the time), and I could go on. All this from something created more than 20 years ago.

But beneath it all were the ideas. Big ideas and small ideas. Ideas that made you think. About philosophy, the nature of our existence, life, relationships. Nothing was off limits and none of the answers were easy or even resolved. I continue to struggle with the one big question. Is progress achieved better through order or chaos?

Now, if some of today's producers and writers want a rich source for new material, instead of the repetitive and regurgitated crap that keeps getting put on the the big screen, they could do worse than mine the rich vein that was B5.

Most of the follow on stories that I have seen for B5 seem to lack 'the Muse'. The main arc has a real purpose, but the B arcs are somewhat lacking.

That having been said, I would love to follow the other worlds, and other threads, if a writer could be found to take up the baton that JRS passes to them.

Jan

Excellent point. We would have to keep the gritty look and retain the fact that the future does not magically solve the legacy problems of humankind (or other species-kind, such as Narn and Centari).

Jan

From what I read by JMS concerning B5, it was supposed to be gritty and unpolished looking. He wanted his show to be a counterpoint to Star Trek where all of mankind's problems were solved and the ships were shiny and clean. JMS felt we have had millenia of time to solve our prejudices and problems and they are still with us, so a few hundred years isn't going to erase those traits. Our ventures into space are going to be in ships designed for practicality over flash and style, so I see JMS wanting to keep some reality in his vision of the future if he were to remake the series.

Gkar: "No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against that power tyrants and dictators cannot stand. The Centauri learned that lesson once. We will teach it to them again. Though it take a thousand years, we will be free."

Jan

Granted they will not be 'the same' but I think a re-casting and remake of the series would be a good idea. The annual threat of cancellation caused some rifts in the storyline, and the replacement of Sinclair by Sheridan was not part of the original plot (though it was a great idea, in retrospect). A better story could be made out of the existing material if it were re-shot.

My problem with the reboot of Star Trek is not so much the characters (who are, in many respects, better portrayed than in the original Star Trek; the acting in Next Generation was (you must admit) a lot better than in the original) but the plot - or lack thereof. The producers have fallen into the 'lets have a lot of things blow up and people will be happy' category of film-making and they need to realize that the SF genre is quite picky about plot and - need I say it - rational behavior. (The plot of Into Darkness made NO sense whatsoever.)

This thread is a spin-off of the "Objectivist Movies" thread. I think that we could make a stronger presentation of the value of freedom in three ways: Gkar against the Centari (a better speech you cannot find!), younger species against the Vorlons and Shadows, and spacer cultures against totalitarian Earth.

Jan
Scarecrow? (edited to add question)

While I' like to see B5 cleaned/restored up I would hope that they would refrain from wasting the $$$ on a cold remake.

The B5 universe presents a multitude of opportunities for equally engaging stories -- i.e. "A view from the gallery"

Wouldn't it be fascinating to know what was transpiring on Centauri Prime, or Narn, or Minbar, or a host of other worlds??? I'd pay good money for those stories.

An excellent point given that great art seems to be almost nonexistent in today's world.
Where are the great artists like Picasso, Warhol and others in abstract. Where are the painters who could capture the subjects personality? Where are the writers who's famous quote can bring a tear to your eye, Dante, Dickens, Tennyson, T.S. Elliot, Gibbon and Melville to mention a few?
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here",
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times”,
“All in the valley of Death, Rode the six hundred”,
“Let us go then, you and I, When the evening is spread out against the sky”,
“Unprovided with original learning, unformed in the habits of thinking, unskilled in the arts of composition, I resolved to write a book”,
"Call me Ishmael".
As Ludwig von Mises once said to a reporter who asked what he thought of the world today “I am amazed”. So am I.

I totally agree about Jupiter. It was a poorly edited film with screwy continuity. It failed to get the basics of film-making down which is a cardinal sin. The bureaucracy segment was almost worth the price of admission -- almost, but not quite. Otherwise, J's thoughts are worth contemplating.

No one can replace the original characters, any more than the soulless actors in the reboot of Star Trek can come close to Kirk, Spock, Bones, and Scott. It's a fool's errand. A reprocessing of the SFX only would be an easy sell, albeit technically difficult for the scenes with SFX and live actors.
Can anyone ever replace Scarecrow and Ms. DeLenn?

But...but...but..."IF?" One Always needs to blow stuff up!

Jan, liked JupAsc.

The most difficult part to cast will be Gkar; next, Mollari. The elevator scene is boggling, and Gkar's speeches on freedom provide the underlying meaning for about a third of the show.

Jan

"No one here is exactly what he appears." Gkar from Babylon 5

I'd love to see B5 done with modern SFX.
However, Jupier Ascending was pathetically bad and I didn't care what happened to any of the 2 dimensional characters. The only scene to remember was one involving dealing with bureaucracy.
B5 had real characters to care about, rational productive goals, heroes at many levels who were unashamed of their philosophy, and the best writing, direction, and production ever seen on television.
(If you need to blow anything up, I know just the guy who has experience in lots of movie features, including Galaxy Quest, Pirates of the Caribbean, Transformers, War Games, and scores more.)

B5 should have been redone already with modern SFX. As you said there are likely 500,000 BlueRay sales just waiting for that to be available on Amazon. It should be a no brainer cash cow for the owner of the rights.
http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/m...

I second that motion, wholeheartedly! I am a shameless scifi geek, I admit, but great character-driven story-telling with modern CGI is a win-win...