Failed Sci-Fi Dramas? Babylon 5

Let’s all be honest with each other and just admit that we’re all nerds here. We’re all fans of stuff and as with any construct, there are areas of overlap and divergent data points. Specifically, in nerdom, there are things that are pretty universally liked and then there are those that are a little, or a lot, off the beaten path. I’m talking, of course, about those shows, books, games, etc. that we might love that others may not quite understand. Why do I bring this up? Well, I’ve recently been dissecting one of those shows that, while not entirely mainstream, isn’t entirely obscure either. It’s been around almost 20 years and it’s got the kind of reputation where you either get it and you love it, or you don’t get it and you hate it. Naturally, I’m referring Babylon 5.

I’ve put a lot of effort in trying to understand what people see in this show. Being more technically minded in my TV intake, I see dated special effects, bad acting and subpar direction. And the first time I watched through the show, that’s exactly what I saw. I didn’t really get anything out of it, except that I’d rather get a root canal than watch it. However, my bar is pretty high, lest we forget that I was raised on Star Trek and I figured that if I wanted a politically charged, thoughtfully executed drama with great acting, engaging story lines and amazing special effects, then I should just watch Deep Space Nine. DS9 set a benchmark for me that was maybe a little too high for Babylon 5 to reach. However, you’ll forgive me this misstep as the two shows did premiere around the same time and the concepts were very similar, at least on the surface.

Now some of you maybe crying foul at your monitors right now because of the widely held public opinion that Paramount stole the concept for DS9 from J. Michael Straczynski’s Babylon 5. I’ve read many articles about this very subject over the years and tried to piece together the truth behind the matter, but ultimately, the truth has been lost to time and it’s really not terribly important anyway. Both shows are good shows in their own rights and both shows had good runs in the end. Yes, both shows used similar concepts and yes, both shows even shared similar character archetypes, but that’s not my area of focus.

Today, I want to focus on a journey similar to the one I took in trying to like Star Wars again, only this time, I wanted to finally get why so many people love Babylon 5. I wanted to delve beneath the cheesy acting, the laughable special effects and the sometimes off putting synthesized score. Don’t blow a gasket yet, we’re getting to the less offensive part. I just need you to understand that I saw Babylon 5 this way until recently. It just also happens that I have found a little room in my heart to give it some love. Just bear in mind that when I come down on the show, it stems from that previous frame of mind. Okay, are we ready to enter the jump gate and get this show moving? Good.

I want to revisit the DS9/Bab5 controversy for a moment. See, it’s true that JMS shopped his pilot for Babylon 5 to Paramount for production back in the day and it is true that they turned him down. However, the details of the fiasco get a little murky from there. JMS has often claimed that executives at Paramount permanently ‘borrowed’ his series bible for B5 and that he was appalled to see the similarities between the two competing shows once DS9 aired. I stumbled across an article not too long ago that included a memo written back when Paramount was toying around with the UPN station and it mentions both shows in the line-up. This is the only evidence that I’ve been able to find that suggests that one did not beget the other. I know I said this wasn’t my area of focus so why do I bring this up? Well, in many ways, I think DS9 represents what B5 could have been with a little more backing from a studio. See, when Warner Bros decided to fund B5 they also decided to jointly start up the Prime Time Entertainment Network, or PTEN, with Paramount in order to distribute. PTEN went on the air in January of 1993 and B5 premiered in February of 1993. So in much the same way that Star Trek: Voyager launched UPN in 1995, B5 was expected to carry a start up network. In November of 1993, Warner Bros announced that they were launching their own standalone network, the WB. And in early 1994, Paramount announced the creation of their own standalone network, UPN. Pile on that the fact that PTEN was really nothing more than a conglomeration of local network affiliates in the first place, and the foundation for the show ends up looking shaky at best. Perhaps in some alternate universe, B5 got picked up by CBS, or something and had a relatively smooth run? We may never know, but the point is, the show started off on a handicap.

I keep mentioning that DS9 and B5 had similar concepts and to a point, they did. Both discussed themes like good versus evil, religion, politics, and war, but that’s where most of the thematic similarities end. B5 delves into things like chaos versus order, destiny versus free will, and sexual normality. These are things that, while DS9 may have glanced over them, it didn’t delve as deeply into them as B5 did. Babylon 5 also took a vastly different approach to exploring these themes, probably because Harlan Ellison was an umbrella consultant for the show. He tends to get really high concept in his delivery of fiction.

The tone of Babylon 5 was pretty unique for the time. It tended to be serious, dark, foreboding, and mysterious. It also used a storytelling method not previously seen much on TV. Instead of presenting a series of loosely related serialized episodes, B5 instead employed a thoroughly planned metaplot. This is another similarity that it shares with DS9, but where DS9 took time to do standalone episodes that didn’t always drive the plot, B5 rarely wasted an episode stepping outside of it. The main story arc for the show was very focused and little time as spent on anything that didn’t directly serve that story. This is a mode that’s been employed numerous times since, both successfully and otherwise. A few shows that borrowed the method include, but are in no way limited to Battlestar Galactica, Jericho, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, and Firefly. All of these are shows that I can confidently recommend watching as everyone of them is pretty outstanding by their own rite.

Now let’s get to the technical aspect of things. We all knew it was coming and I think it really needs to be said. From a technical aspect, B5 is really a mixed bag. The decision was made early on to use computer generated space effects and even blue screen back drops. While this could be commended and seen as cutting edge for the time, it was also terribly expensive, and the field improved drastically over just a short period of time. In fact, by the time B5 was ending its run, DS9 was already employing CG effects that were nearly indistinguishable from their practical effects. Thus, the special effects haven’t really aged very well. There are definitely some ambitious and even memorable shots, but when the render is real time and details just suddenly appear out of nowhere, it makes things hard to buy. Also, by using CG, the B5 production team was unable to assemble stock space effects. This shows early on in the lack of activity in the space oriented establishing shots. Around the fourth season, the team did managed to bulk up the space activity though.

I also mentioned the acting and the direction. These things also end up a mixed bag depending on the episode and sometimes even from scene to scene. There are times when performances seem really good and other times when said performances border on laughable. I always joke that you know when B5 is trying to make a point because the actors will scream the most mundane lines. It ends up feeling out of place and melodramatic. What I’m saying is that either the actors, or the directors just didn’t grasp the concept of subtlety. I understand completely. It’s a hard concept to wrap your head around, but when you’re trying to make a show that’s got a Hollywood budget and a professional production staff, the expectations tend to be a bit higher. I won’t go any further with that. Just know that if you decide to give the show a try, there are going to be a number of WTF moments along the way. The acting does improve somewhat as the show progresses though.

Finally, since it’s kind of my thing, let’s talk about the music. Let me just say that Christopher Franke wrote some amazing music for the show and its various spinoffs and movies. However, I feel like the decision to go with a mostly synthesized score really hurt the potential dramatic tension on the show. That said, I know it was done to cut production costs and since the CG decision stemmed from the same place, I’ll just concede that at least this measure might actually have accomplished its goal. As an audio engineer myself, I realize that there are far too many nuances involved with music to ever truly capture them with synths, especially in orchestral scoring. Minute changes in pitch, timbre, and volume make each instrument and performance unique and very rarely does that ever carry through with synth. The score should act as a character in the piece; telling our hearts what to feel and our brains how to react; leading us on an exciting journey into unexplored places and the realm of emotion is an extremely nuanced place. Thus, the music needs to be able to communicate on that level and I don’t really feel like synths can accomplish that very well. Mini rant aside, the notes that are being used in the score are very well composed and I should like to see, one day, an orchestral performance of some of the highlight music from the show.

Now let’s delve into something a little bit deeper, shall we? For those of you who might be reading this that have watched the show, I pose this question: Who are the main characters of the show? In other shows, it’s usually pretty easy to tell. For instance, in Next Generation it was Picard, Data, Crusher(s), and Worf. These are the characters that writing staff went out of their way to explore. These are the characters that got entire episodes devoted to them and in some cases, on a fairly regular basis. These are the characters whose actions drove the show more than anyone else. In Babylon 5, it’s a little more difficult to define these roles Perhaps this stems from the precise vision that JSm had for the story, or perhaps it’s because of a lack of basic writing skills, I don’t know. I am willing to give the whole situation the benefit of the doubt, however, because after much introspection and pondering, I’ve come to the conclusion that Order and Chaos are the main characters. It’s a pretty brilliant setup if it’s what JMS and crew were going for from the beginning. In the show, the two elements are the protagonist and the antagonist. Order is represented by Sinclair, Ivonova, Garibaldi, Franklin, Delenn, and Lenneir. Chaos is primarily represented by Londo, and then later Morden. Londo’s assistant Vir becomes an unwilling participant in the chaotic machinations and eventually leads Londo back to redemption. G’Kar plays the role of mediator between the two. The show tries to portray Sinclair as a savior figure, but really, I think G’Kar fills that role more directly than Sinclair. G’Kar sinks below all of his peers in order to redeem both his own people and Londo’s people.He suffers all manner of afflictions in order to save millions of people he doesn’t know. This dichotomy of chaos versus order and the need for mediation between the two in order to maintain balance makes for an interesting concept and fascinating watching.

In all, Babylon 5, although not without its faults, ends up being an entertaining and a satisfying watch. If you pay attention close enough to catch on to what’s under the surface, you get a lot of perception challenging themes. It’s unfortunate that there are a number of great shows like Babylon 5 that suffered the fate of premature cancellation, but I recommend tracking these types of shows down. They challenge what we think we know of our world and provoke us to reach beyond our own understanding to try and learn more about ourselves and humanity and that’s the mark of successful Science fiction!

*Update: I realized after I had finished watching this series, which happened after publication of this article, that I had never actually seen the series finale of the show. Having seen it finally, I can say that I did get a little misty eyed there at the end. I commend the show for helping me develop emotional ties that made an impact on me.

Fanboys

Fanboys:

Well, here we are finishing up our month of underrated comedies. This particular movie is perhaps the most underrated of the all. It failed to make back even one quarter of its budget at the box office, but it has managed to gain a cult following, even if the crowd is a small one. So, Fanboys… This movie is another fine entry into what I like to call the road trip comedy sub-genre. Some of the more memorable entries in this category include greats like Tommy Boy and Dumb and Dumber. You know the type. They start with some sort of motivation to embark on a journey of a literal kind and over the course of the journey, the protagonist(s) learn valuable life lessons. I don’t know what makes this particular type of comedy so resonant with me personally, but I’ve run across very few road trip comedies that I haven’t enjoyed.

This movie is no exception! So what are its strengths? Well, Fanboys carries its identity well and doesn’t deviate from that identity whatsoever. It’s a goofy comedy about Star Wars fanboys taking a road trip. Like Accepted, there aren’t really any frills. Each scene builds on the plot and moves said plot along nicely. From a music supervision standpoint, it’s got some great stuff going on. The licensed music fits each scenario very well. Oh, did I mention that this is an anachronistic film? That’s kind of important. The movie is supposed to take place roughly six months before the theatrical release of Phantom Menace. Hard to believe that that’s been nearly 20 years ago, but great care is taken to bring the viewer back to that time. The script is solid. The gags are fantastic and range from the “so subtle you just might miss it” to “What?! You missed that?!” There are plenty of jokes to go around and plenty of moments that will have you laughing your butt off. Probably the number one reason to watch this film is the cameos that were worked it. The list reads like a nerd’s wet dream! Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Ray Parks, Seth Rogen, and William Shatner all make appearances in this movie. That’s the short list! Head on over to Wikipedia if you’d like a more comprehensive list.

So all the ingredients of a great movie are there. Why then, is this film sitting on a 57% audience freshness rating? Honestly, I can’t say. I got my copy of the movie as a gift and at first glance, I wasn’t sure that I’d like it very much me being a Trekkie and all. But, the film really stands on its own. It doles out some light ribbing to Star Wars fans and Trekkies alike, but as fans, we need to be able to laugh at ourselves from time to time. It is a simple formula and some may say a tired one, but it’s the simple formulae that stick around the longest. The road trip comedy has been around probably since movies were invented. That might be its greatest weakness. Fanboys didn’t attempt to do anything innovative, or even new because it didn’t have to. It’s not the latest Chris Nolan film trying to push the boundaries of filmmaking. I think some might have perceived that confidence in a trid and true formula as a sign of playing things safe. But in our world of continual and impractical escalation, it’s sometimes refreshing to watch a movie that focuses on doing something that already exists and doing it really well. Sometimes you don’t need to reinvent anything to make a great movie. If you take anything away from the previous month’s reviews, take that. Great movies are made based on how they make you feel and if an off the wall disaster of a movie like, say, BioDome makes you feel good and makes you laugh, then it’s accomplished its goal. That doesn’t mean that I won’t come along and give it a scathing review in the future, but it does me that you should cherish your relationship with that movie. That’s been the crux of all of these comedy reviews. They’re not underrated simply because they were done solidly, they’re underrated because underneath all the negative hype that might turn you away from them, there are movies that have the potential to make your day better. Remember that when I’m spouting negativities about a film. I sincerely hope that you find time to give these underrated gems a try. And as a parting piece of wisdom, I would just like to say, Han Solo is a bitch!

Have a great week and don’t miss out on next week where I’ll be discussing failed Sci-Fi dramas!

Accepted

Accepted:

Let me just say that I am SO glad to be reviewing this movie for the blog! If Benchwarmers was you lowbrow schoolyard humor film, Accepted is its witty and sarcastic cousin. Accepted is by far one of my favorite comedies of all time. There is SO much to love about this movie and it really doesn’t get the kind of attention, to say the least of praise, that it deserves.

Accepted is the story of a group of friends who get passed over by the colleges that they apply to and have to come up with a backup plan quick in order to satisfy the expectations of their parents and save face with their peers. That’s the nutshell synopsis, but the movie is so much more than that so let’s take a hard look at an under appreciated comedy masterpiece.

There’s a lot to cover with this movie and I’m going to try and keep it somewhat brief, but let’s start with the actors chosen for this film. The cast reads like a who’s who of today’s brightest upcoming stars. You’ve got Justin Long, Jonah Hill, Blake Lively, Robin Lord Taylor, and Hannah Marks, just to name a few whose stars have been on the rise in the last decade. And their performances are all brilliant! Down to the extras in the background, every actor on this film gives an A+ performance throughout. Never is a line phoned in, or delivered half way. There’s an energy level that the movie sets for itself and that level is carried out all the way through to the end. Every last character has a focused backstory, even when it’s not thoroughly explored and that gives each one a concrete and grounded place within the narrative.

The story itself is brilliant as well! It’s one of only a handful of movies that I can scrutinize and not find any glaring plot holes with. Nothing is wasted either. Every second that was committed to the running time serves the story and the humor of the picture. It’s fantastic! The movie knows what it wants to be and the focus on maintaining that identity is unreal. What exactly does the movie want to be? Well, mostly it just wants to be goofy, and sarcastic, and entertaining, but below the surface, it also has a few things to say. There’s a lot of commentary going on in this movie. There’s satirical, sometimes scathing, anti-establishment themes throughout, especially as pertains to the shortcomings of the system of higher education. But there’s a little anti-consumerism, a dash of keeping creativity and passions alive, and poignant thoughts on the monetization of knowledge, and finally, some useful insight into the differences between baby boomers philosophies and millennials philosophies on life.

Currently, the movie holds a 37% freshness rating with critics and a 72% freshness rating with audiences on Rotten Tomatoes so obviously, a few people are getting it. But what aren’t we getting with this movie? The comedy is, dare I say, perfect almost throughout. Every gag is timed amazingly, every character is used to their maximum effectiveness, and every situation just up the ante even more as the film progresses. One can’t help, but bust a gut whenever Lewis Black is on the screen. There are minute details hidden throughout that just layer the humor more and more each time the movie is watched. There are even some very forward thinking gags. For example, the name of the fictional college in the film is South Harmon Institute of Technology, or S.H.I.T. The gag works on its own, but it’s enriched even more by recent George Mason University Antonin Scalia School of Law scandal (cut it out A.S.S.o.L.s!). Even when the humor is in the gutter, the use of double entendre is genius. I can’t think of a comedy that uses its humor better than this movie. The content is just smart all around!

I apologize if this particular review lacks the usual flare that you’ve come to expect, but I really feel for this movie. See, the biggest irony is that the film does what it sets out to do so well, that it leaves no room for much of anything to be said. It’s an extremely well executed and competent film. There are definitely moments of over-the-top hilarity and for those moments alone, I really recommend watching this movie, but in its competence, it just comes across as average. That’s really ironic considering that one of the reasons that the main protagonist keeps getting rejected by colleges is that he’s too average. But, he engineered that life of mediocrity to a point and he uses that facade to hide the truly amazing things about him. In much the same way, Accepted as a film hides real brilliance behind reliable competence. The parallels are uncanny and a little sad. The movie really is laugh out loud funny, it just pulls it off too well for anyone to buzz about it. And the ideas that it’s trying to get across are both enlightening and inspiring. Who hasn’t felt like there was more that they wanted out of life at some point? Or that the word fails to appreciate us for the value that we really offer? And who hasn’t dreamed of finding that something that we’re so impassioned about that we don’t just do it everyday, but we live it everyday of our lives?

There are a lot of complexities that could be covered with this movie and perhaps when the day finally comes that I’m doing these via video instead, I can really delve into them, but there’s an inspiring film that is encouraging everyone everywhere to dream huge and to follow their passions; to not worry so much about what’s considered the convention and to definitely not take the safe road simply for the comfort it offers. This movie challenges viewers to let go of complacency and go after the best things in life. It really is an amazing film with a lot to say that says it all in a way that is explosively hilarious and refreshingly witty and original. Grab some corn, grab a friend, grab yourself… And give Accepted a watch! I guarantee, you won’t be sorry that you did.

Benchwarmers

Benchwarmers

A good reason to tread lightly...

Where do I even begin with this movie? Well, first of all, in challenging myself to review underrated comedies, I learned that I have exquisite taste in movies. I’m serious! I looked long and hard through all the movies I own and very few of them had less that a 70% audience rating on rotten tomatoes! That’s made finding appropriate movies a difficult thing and I wasn’t sure that I wanted to review this movie, but my options are somewhat limited in terms of what I actually own. (I’m terribly picky about what I’ll buy on DVD or bluray.) I know this movie is probably going to be a hard sell for some people. Initially, it was for me too, but with an open and unbiased mind, perhaps you can start to see the good that this film has to offer as well.

So what is this movie all about and why did it make my cut off for underrated comedies? Well, this movie, along with a handful of others manages to successfully recapture a few ingredients from film that had faded out by that point. The movie is produced by Adam Sandler, whose star was on the decline by that point and it starred Rob Schneider, who’s never made any other films that I’ve seen and enjoyed. Please feel free to comment if there’s one that you think is worth note, but I’ve always seen Schneider as an ensemble comedian. This fits since he got his start on Saturday Night Live, and he’s always been great at adding to a scene, but never really at carrying the scene.

Thus, the ingredients being used to make this movie were already offbeat and on paper it all seems like a recipe for disaster. I can easily understand why people would be leery of this movie. Let’s take a look at what’s going on… Rob Schneider plays a plucky landscaping professional with a love of baseball. His main cohorts are Jon Heder, David Spade and Jon Lovitz, who play Clark and Richie respectively. From the get go, it’s established that Schneider’s character, Gus, is the king of nerds. He’s witty, he’s good at baseball, and he takes the lowly under his wing and tries to help them see their own self-worth. Gus, Clark and Richie get noticed by Lovitz’s character Mel beating a little league team and Mel decides to sponsor them. It’s later revealed that Gus used to bully people in school, which gets him kicked off the team. BUT! Gus makes amends with his former victim, gets accepted back to the team and they all live happily ever after. It’s a pretty straightforward concept, but one that’s been known to work really well.

You may be asking why I actually took the time to summarize the plot. Believe me, I’m the king of TL;DR, but in this case, it’s kind of necessary. See, the formula is not all that different from what Adam Sandler used in his ‘good’ movies. Those classics that we all love like ‘Billy Madison’, ‘Happy Gilmore’, and ‘Big Daddy’ all used this same formula. Sandler eventually outgrew this particular formula and as he took for.ever. to realize this… Wait, has he actually realized this? Seriously, I haven’t watched a new Sandler film since, like 2004. Anyway, as he painfully began to age out, it seemed like the formula had become obsolete. But, here comes ‘Benchwarmers’ putting it through one more lap! This seems like it would make for an awful movie and indeed, it’s no classic by any stretch, but just like the subject matter that it covers, it winds up scoring an underdog win.

With all these things working against it, ‘Benchwarmers’ should have been a disaster so why am I here praising it. Well, it manages to recapture the good old days of decent Adam Sandler films using Rob Schneider as a stand in. And I mean ALL the elements are there. There’s the plucky underdog protagonist who scores with a woman WAY out of his league (Scheider’s ‘wife’ is played by Molly Sims), the cameos by SNL alumnists, the tragic mistake that nearly costs the protagonist his success and the come from behind ‘win’. It’s an Adam Sandler film from the 90s minus Sandler. But in this case, it all works really well. It touches on enough nostalgia that I’m instantly transported back to my awkward high school years and that just makes the theme more resonant with me.

The theme is anti-bullying. In this regards, I’m not sure if I should applaud the writers for being ahead of the curve since bullying has been a pretty big issue in recent years. I’d definitely say that this movie covers in ahead of a lot of others and opens up a dialog in an awkward, yet palatable way.It’s the theme that really makes this film stand out as it attempts to teach its audience that we can all have a positive influence on other’s lives if we only help them to see the good in themselves. It’s a surprisingly good platform coming from the same crew that gave us all ‘Little’ Nicky’. Now, it is supposed to mimic a Sandler movie so the humor is low brow, kind of schoolyard humor, and there are a couple of moments where a few gags are taken a little too far, but on the whole, it uses its identity really well. It’s not trying to innovate, it’s just trying to remind us that doing an established things really well can make for a good and enjoyable movie.

There are a few highlights in this movie that I feel I should point out. First, Jon Lovitz’s Mel is the ultimate nerd. When first we meet him, he’s driving a replica of K.I.T.T. from ‘Knight Rider’. Later we see him driving a replica of the 60s Batmobile. Then when we get to see his home, he’s got more nerd swag that I could shake a stick at. To make a short point long, if I suddenly found myself earning obscene amounts of money, I’d be doing EXACTLY what his character was doing. That makes the character extremely relatable because it represents a sort of wish fulfillment for a lot of viewers. Gus is also a really relatable character as the guy who genuinely wants to make lives better for the nerds. Sure he had to learn his lesson by being the other guy, but who hasn’t made some serious mistakes in their lives? Also, Nick Swardson as Howie is a riot! He's a deeply troubled kind of weirdo who learns to overcome his fears and accept himself through the power of external encouragement.

The writing, the pacing, and most of the humor in this movie are really strong. There are a few aspects that are completely over the top, but those exist in just about all comedies, and especially in old Sandler movies. There are a few good lessons to be learned by the end of the film about treating others well, but also the movie tries to teach us that while competition can be good, taking it to an excess is bad, and we should always be having fun, at least in sports. Along with that, it tries to impart that we can have fun even if we’re not winning. That the fun is derived from doing our best and BEING our best,because at the end of the day, we only lose if we stop trying. It’s a very zen sportsmanship message.

With funny moments that are too numerous to list in this short article, and lessons that can help us all to be better, I give ‘Benchwarmers’ two enthusiastic thumbs up! It’s campy, goofy, and sometimes more of those things than it maybe needs to be, and perhaps the humor is not terribly intelligent, but if you grew up in the 90s, it’s like wrapping yourself in a familiar old blanket. I think that is pretty cool. Dust off your mit, grab a tub of corn and give this one a shot! I guarantee that you won’t be disappointed.