Babylon 5

Thinking about it, B5 is actually a really good bet. It's a show that did better than projected, is in the nostalgia bracket now, so an established brand, most fans know about how it got screwed over repeatedly, the DV Ds have consistently sold well, apparently the HD remastered version was a success (even if it looks a bit janky sometimes) and JMS has gotten some attention for stuff like Sense 8 from other audiences.

It kind of makes sense why they're hanging on to it while cutting stuff like Roswell: New Mexico that has a fanbase but doesn't seem to be setting the world on fire.

I sure should hope so, for a landmark show like this one.

So how would the reboot be different from the original?

Reposting for context: On today's upfront, The CW's CEO Mark Pedowitz reaffirms that the reboot is still in active development.

I’m guessing one change will be that some of the character switchovers they did to deal with casting changes won’t happen (e.g., Sheridan and Sinclair will be the same person - i.e. Sheridan with Sinclair’s backstory and possibly personality, but Sheridan’s character arc; Talia and Lyta will be the same person).

So will the actors be signed on for multiple years then? I assume they need some assurance that their actors won't decide they have better projects to be in halfway through.

Standard lead actor contracts now are 5 or 6 years/seasons, IIRC. It's why Syfy has almost never had a scripted show run longer than five years (the big exception, Stargate SG-1, only ran on Syfy for five years, it was on Showtime before.)

Edited by Zendervai on May 19th 2022 at 4:07:28 AM

JMS has said that he's basically planning to start fresh with the reboot, rather than feeling obligated to use the previous iteration as any sort of roadmap. So maybe characters get used in new ways, or are replaced entirely (there's no guarantee that there will be a Sinclair or Sheridan at all at this point), and basically approaching it as 2022 JMS would and not 1992 JMS.

Seeing some of the stuff he had wanted to do in the 90s and couldn't, I'm really curious to see what he pulls off in the post-network TV era.

Well, I think the official statement including a reference to a "John Sheridan" is a pretty good hint that there will be a John Sheridan in the show.

He will probably have to recast a lot of characters anyway. Katsulas has died, and Peter Jurasik is old enough that he can now play the elderly emperor without makeup.

Huh, Claudia Christian's wikipedia doesn't list a birth date.

Have any of the original cast expressed interest in returning to the series?

JMS has talked about this specifically in the past.

Full across the board recast, no question about it. Anything else is entirely non-viable and completely unworkable. However, he did say that if the actors were interested, he'd want to cast some of the original actors in new, more minor roles. An example was Bruce Boxleitner as the President of Earth in the series (not President Clark, a different one). Claudia Christian might not be interested, she and JMS still don't really seem to get along with each other.

Again, he's trying out some new story ideas.

B5 wore its Lord Of The Rings inspo on it's sleeve but there were some other ideas that were of a time and place.

On the Lurker's Guide and on USENET (yes I'm old, shut up) JMS wrote that some episodes were written as a counter to the "Me Decade" of The '80s.

If the CW can pull this off without trying to make a cheap action series, it will be interesting. I may buy and over-the-air antenna for my TV so I can get the CW.

So I have been thinking about watching this show, but I am reluctant to do so because for one thing from what I have found out about Sheridan he sounds more like a sociopath or a Neo-Napoleon than a hero or even an anti-hero for that matter. I mean what kind of "hero" commits hazing, and uses suicide bombers and telepathic slaves just to get what he wants? And at least the heroes from Star Trek and Stargate could show some humility now and then, but this guy just seems to only know arrogance.

Now for the record Sheridan is just one of the reasons why I am reluctant to watch this show. And I know I should watch the show first before I make these kinds of judgement calls. But at least let me ask this question: Is Sheridan really as great a hero as people make him out to be, warts and all?

And if you are wondering where I got this information, check the tv tropes page under Earth Alliance Characters and the Babylon 5 wiki.

Edited by jacky986 on Sep 29th 2022 at 9:18:49 AM

Sheridan is a hero. He gets his hands dirty, sure, but he's saving the universe from annihilation. He's not a saint, but his heart's in the right place.

My advice is to watch the first few episodes, then see if you want to commit. If you don't, you don't, but at least you can say you gave it a shot.

Edited by kkhohoho on Sep 29th 2022 at 8:51:17 AM

One thing to remember is that TV Tropes pages tend to strip out a lot of the quieter character bits. I mean, hell, the show actually directly addresses the telepath thing. The moral element is a major part of like three episodes. And "telepath slaves" is uh...really misrepresenting the actual situation.

It settles on the side of it's morally really gross but the Shadows have a huge advantage and it's one of the only ways the good guys can find to lessen said advantage. Being morally completely squeaky clean is great, but it's very hard to do in a war with a genocidal enemy.

When it comes to the telepaths he's not using people who are otherwise fine. When the Shadows get their hands on a telepath, the best case scenario is basically catatonia and it's super unclear if recovery is at all possible, since the Shadows have a habit of taking their agents, completely destroying their minds and building a new personality in its place, and the point is to serve as living CP Us for Shadow vessels. Sheridan's using the catatonic telepaths to interfere with and damage the Earth vessels, weakening them, and he makes a point of not using telepaths who have families or strong connections, even though even the Psicorps thinks it's impossible to heal the impacted telepaths.

Sheridan is also not actually framed as a moral paragon. He's framed like a pretty flawed individual who can get up to some real petty antics at times. Though admittedly not to the level of Garibaldi. Sinclair is framed like the paragon, more or less.

Edited by Zendervai on Sep 29th 2022 at 10:20:51 AM

Eh, the framing of Sheridan is debatable. He's not given as much crap as he should be. Same with Delenn but he's not a monster.

Also by the time you reach those moments you're well into season 4 and pretty invested the characters and plot arc.

Still the fact that he just sacrificed those telepaths without a second thought and doesn't get called out on it just doesn't sit right with me. On top of that by this point it wasn't so much about stopping a genocide than it was stopping a nutcase villain. And if Sheridan wanted to stop Clark while avoiding to kill more Earthforce personnel, why doesn't he just send a small strikeforce of assassins to kill Clark before he can do more damage instead of openly engaging them in battle?

Don't get me wrong I like a story about an anti-hero as much as any other viewer but if you are going to make them the MC you should give them some standards that even they won't cross. As the great Mike Farrell (BJ Hunicutt) once said "Some things are wrong and they are always wrong."

Edited by jacky986 on Sep 29th 2022 at 12:40:52 PM

Maybe watch the show first instead of wonking about one particular character right away?

This. Just reading summaries, doesn't reflect how it actually happens and is presented on the show. You're skipping to the end of a long arc.

Plus if you watch the show you've got a season of episodes to watch before Sheridan even becomes a thing.

What everyone else said. Just watch the show. If you don't like it, you don't like it, but summaries aren't a proper substitute for watching it.

Edited by kkhohoho on Sep 29th 2022 at 1:14:05 PM

He also like...does get called out.

And it's a plot point that Earth is basically inaccessible for that part of the show.

Offhand references on a trope page does not make for a good picture of what actually happens.

He gets called out by one of the major villains of the show, which is actually a pretty interesting situation that might have gotten more time spent on it if the show wasn't about to get cancelled (or so they thought). Also, the nutcase villain in question did ultimately try to commit indiscriminate mass murder (not technically genocide, but still the potential deaths of millions)

Having said that, this whole conversation is actually kind of interesting given that there is a recurring theme about Sheridan and his friends being viewed one way or the other depending on who is talking about them. There's an entire episode devoted to the idea called "The Deconstruction of Falling Stars" and it is some fantastic television.

Anyways, I say go ahead and try the show out. As others have said, you're missing a lot of context and your hesitation is based around a character who isn't in the first season of the show at all.

Oh, and you'll probably want to have this chart for how to watch the show and various movies and series in order if you get the box set.

Isn't the end of season 5 chronologically after everything else. Except for most of the season 4 finale?

I've got the complete boxset and I'm watching season 5 atm. I've not bothered with any movies other than The Gathering.

Edited by dcutter2 on Oct 1st 2022 at 4:17:10 PM

The final episode of season 5, and thus the series finale is indeed a Distant Finale set in 2280, and thus 20 years after most events of the main series.

A few notes on the above:

There are two versions of the B5 pilot. JMS had an absolutely terrible experience with the first version and didn't like the final product, went back a few years later to give it the George Lucas treatment and came out with a much better product. THAT SAID, the much better product is also considered to spoil a couple of things later in the first season... but honestly not a big deal either way. "The Gathering" is specifically the improved version, the original one I think was just called "Babylon 5" or "Pilot" or something like that and is actually available for free on Amazon Prime Video the last time I looked.

It's very "Early 90s non-Trek TV sci-fi" which you can interpret as a positive or negative as you please.

I'd say watch both "In The Beginning" and "Thirdspace" after Season 4. "Thirdspace" honestly has such a hard time fitting into continuity anywhere I just consider it an out-of-continuity side story. That said, don't skip "Thirdspace," it's a great little thing.

For the rest of the movies, I'd say just watch them after you finish Season 5. None of them tie into continuity in any critical way except for "A Call to Arms" and "The Lost Tales." If you forget to watch "Legend of the Rangers" most B5 fans won't be upset about that. I liked it, but I have yet to meet anyone else who did.

If you want to start a fight, ask which order you should watch the Crusade episodes in.

The Lost Tales basically slots in after all of the other shows and movies. Bits of Season 4 and Season 5's finales take place after everything else, but don't worry about that. Crusade and The Legend of the Rangers don't focus on the core B5 crew either way and none of the core characters from those shows appear in either the S4 or S5 finale.