TV/Movies Megathread

[Barrister]

Babylon 5's issues aren't in the computer graphics.
The entire pacing, much of the acting, and general 'feel' of the show has a real typical early 90s US TV quality.
I don't know what it is that the contemporary Trek series do different but they usually manage to avoid this despite also coming from the pre-Sopranos era.

It's the opposite, actually. B5's issue is that it wanted to be more cinematic, while trying to fit within a traditional 22-episodes-a-season broadcast show, which have grueling production demands and schedules. There's a reason why modern TV shows have 8-10 episodes a season. Star Trek played it more safe.

Maybe it's where they failed. Trying to be a movie whilst being made for tv = very typical made for tv movie look.
It certainly looks more dated than ds9.

Maybe you're just talking about the budget.

DS9 definitely had a higher production budget than B5.

[celedhring]

Yeah, but even taking the higher budgets into account I feel that Star Trek were smarter about it. TNG looks like a pretty standard TV show despite all the sci-fi dressing. Very flat lightning, simple camera setups, limited number of sets. Then the show became more complex as seasons went on, and then DS9 kicked it up another notch.  B5 went all guns blazing right from the start - I will always admire that show's ambition though.

[Josquius]

TNG in the early series does feel a bit dated. Feels closer to TOS than it does it's later series.
But I don't know. There's something about the feel that makes it more acceptably outdated.
Something with the sort of cameras used? Or my mind covering over the cracks with later trek?

[grumbler]

Maybe you're just talking about the budget.

DS9 definitely had a higher production budget than B5.

DS9 had almost twice the budget, plus access to Paramount's stages.  B5 was designed to be inexpensive, and it shows.  But the writing (bar some of the dialogue) and especially the score (it was the first show fully scored) make up for it.   DS9 was chasing B5 in every area (literally chasing, in some cases, like switching to a story arc halfway through) bar visuals and acting talent/budget.

[Barrister]

Maybe you're just talking about the budget.

DS9 definitely had a higher production budget than B5.

DS9 had almost twice the budget, plus access to Paramount's stages.  B5 was designed to be inexpensive, and it shows.  But the writing (bar some of the dialogue) and especially the score (it was the first show fully scored) make up for it.   DS9 was chasing B5 in every area (literally chasing, in some cases, like switching to a story arc halfway through) bar visuals and acting talent/budget.

I remember that while the sets set on the station itself were fine, anytime the show went off the station some of the sets were almost laughably cheap.

[crazy canuck]

I don't actually remember problems with production values.  I was hooked right from the start.  The story is what drew me in.

[Barrister]

I don't actually remember problems with production values.  I was hooked right from the start.  The story is what drew me in.

I mean I watched the show and loved it.  I think I've even rewatched it once or twice.

But I noticed the production values also.

[Tamas]

Started Ted Lasso recently, up to episode 5 of season 1 so far.

I like it.

[grumbler]

I remember that while the sets set on the station itself were fine, anytime the show went off the station some of the sets were almost laughably cheap.

Yes.  They could lavish some attention of the permanent sets to make them better over time, but not on the temporary sets.

Speaking of production in TH and movies, I know that it used to be that SF show and movie prop masters tried to fit in the Oscillation Overthruster prop from Buckaroo Banzai somewhere in the filming (it was a medical device among many other things in TNG and DS9 and a part of Garibaldi's missing ship in B5).  Anyone heard of more recent sightings?

[frunk]

Almost done with Better Call Saul.  Why has Rhea Seehorn not won all the awards?

[HVC]

Never really got into B5, but it seem liked standard production quality for late 90s sci-fi like early DS9, earth final conflict Farscape, or lexx. As the season went some get better like DS9 and Farscape, some stayed the same (b5) and some got worse (earth final conflict). I guess it depended on the rating and the cash that brought.


Also, now I want to watch Lexx again. And I didn't realize how rich late 90s sci-fi was until just this moment.

[viper37]

Never really got into B5, but it seem liked standard production quality for late 90s sci-fi like early DS9, earth final conflict Farscape, or lexx. As the season went some get better like DS9 and Farscape, some stayed the same (b5) and some got worse (earth final conflict). I guess it depended on the rating and the cash that brought.


Also, now I want to watch Lexx again. And I didn't realize how rich late 90s sci-fi was until just this moment.

You can't put EFC with the rest of these shows, seriously.

[HVC]

Never really got into B5, but it seem liked standard production quality for late 90s sci-fi like early DS9, earth final conflict Farscape, or lexx. As the season went some get better like DS9 and Farscape, some stayed the same (b5) and some got worse (earth final conflict). I guess it depended on the rating and the cash that brought.


Also, now I want to watch Lexx again. And I didn't realize how rich late 90s sci-fi was until just this moment.

You can't put EFC with the rest of these shows, seriously.

What, it's Roddenberry's follow up to Star Trek?

ok, ok the overall quality is far off from the rest, but the  beginning production quality is similar, isn't it?

[viper37]

Never really got into B5, but it seem liked standard production quality for late 90s sci-fi like early DS9, earth final conflict Farscape, or lexx. As the season went some get better like DS9 and Farscape, some stayed the same (b5) and some got worse (earth final conflict). I guess it depended on the rating and the cash that brought.


Also, now I want to watch Lexx again. And I didn't realize how rich late 90s sci-fi was until just this moment.

You can't put EFC with the rest of these shows, seriously.

What, it's Roddenberry's follow up to Star Trek?

ok, ok the overall quality is far off from the rest, but the  beginning production quality is similar, isn't it?

Ahhh.

Well.  Yes.  Season 1 for Season 1, it's just as bad.
EFC Season 2 and 3 started to get better.  Season 4 started to degrade a bit in quality but was still watchable.  Season 5... Well, sexaholic space vampires...  I've seen better. 

[viper37]

Sometimes, I start watching a tv show that's not great, but not terribly bad either.  Then it's one season after the next. 

There are some good moments, sometimes.  But then, the quality starts dropping.  Badly.  There are new actors to elevate the show, but the story, or stories itself are getting worst.  Sloppy writing, nothing makes any sense "in universe".

Yet, I'm still invested in it, I want to see how it will end.

Does this happen to you?  I hitch to watch the final season of The Walking Dead, even though I thoroughly disliked the last two or three.

Now, I'm watching NCIS: Los Angeles, the last season, I find the show to be incredibly boring, but there's only a few episodes left, I just want to see how it'll end.

Same with the Blacklist.  I've lost all interest in what is happening onscreen.  But I want to see the ultimate fate of Raymond Reddington.

I can't explain why.  I find the show to have lost all direction since at least 2019.  Yet, I'm still there.

Ah well. It'll be over in a month.