![]() Actually, that's another point - the aliens. Not to mention the "odd couple" of Peter Jurasik (Londo) and Andreas Katsulas (G'Kar) - wonderful. Another favourite would have to be Stephen Furst as Vir - DS9 fans just think Rom, and you're halfway there. It would have been so easy just to play him as an action-hero, but no. Also, as stated above, I am a fan of Cmdr Sinclair - and I think Michael O'Hare's portrayal of him is wonderfully underplayed. She is one of those people that when she is speaking, becomes the absolute centre of attention without really trying. In particular, Mira Furlan as Delenn is worth watching she is possessed of a presence and an aura most actors can only dream of. Moving on to the acting - this show was blessed with some wonderful people. The same principle applies in B5 - although to a lesser degree. We know how it works - so by watching Kirk fire his phaser, we understand implicitly that it is a weapon. For example, Captain Kirk picks up a phaser and fires it without stopping to explain what it was or what it did - after all, in a contemporary series, nobody goes out of their way to say how a gun. That's why in the original series of Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry made a point of not explaining the workings of anything. The characters have to act as if the basic premise of the series is perfectly normal to them. The key to good science-fiction is believability. This is especially true of planet surfaces, in particular Mars. If there is one stumbling block for B5, I would have to say that some of the computer-generated images (CGI) are not always up to standard. You see an insignificant detail in season 1, suddenly it is explained in season 3 as being very relevant for reasons you didn't even know about back in the first season. The series is so intense - I was watching up to eight or nine episodes a day, for a week solid! And might I say again, I was a Star Trek fan who had never seen B5 before in my life! As many people before me have said, this show isn't a nice neat everything-gets-resolved-in-the-space-of-one-episode type. The amount of detail is extraordinary, the way all the characters and plots became intertwined is amazing. And while I still prefer Sinclair as a leader, by about episode 8 of season 2, I found that I didn't have the time to miss him, things were moving that quickly, there were so many plots unravelling. Then, about a third of the way in, the pace quickened up - considerably. Out of the two leaders, I prefer Sinclair, and for the first few episodes of season 2, I was unconvinced. Again, I was a little wary at first it had been a while since I'd seen season 1, and I knew that Sinclair had been replaced by John Sheridan. Then, after a long wait, my friend lent me seasons 2-4. I especially liked Jeffrey Sinclair as a leader-type - someone more thoughtful than your bog-standard action-hero. Once I got a feel for what was going on, and how the characters worked, yes. To be fair, it took a little while - I was a little wary at first, but it quickly grew on me. Then, about four months ago, my best friend lent me his B5 DVDs of season 1. Well, what to say? For starters, I'm a die-hard Classic Star Trek fan, who had until recently been aware of B5 without ever having seen it.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |