Babylon 5 Coming Back?

SaturnTim writes "Babylon 5 fans rejoice! It appears that our favorite space outpost is back. It will be returning soon in a series of direct-to-DVD 20min episodes, each featuring the past of one of our favorite characters."

Babylon 5: The Lost Tales

It's interesting that this is a straight to DVD production. I'm not a huge fan of Babylon 5 but I am very interested to see what distribution method they seek.

The recent news is Warner Bros. is putting Babylon 5 on iTunes [pocket-lint.co.uk]. That's right, you'll be able to purchase episodes of the sci-fi show on iTunes. Could they promote this service by releasing The Lost Tales a few weeks early on iTunes? I think they could probably garner quite a bit of money from Apple if they were willing to do that.

After all, what better fanbase for Apple to secure than the Babylon 5 tech/trek group? Old nerds with lots of money and few vices. I know some people at work that would buy a video iPod just to have copies of Babylon 5 on their person at all times.

This could probably be a television show that successfully bypasses all traditional forms of distribution which would set huge precedence for weaning the public from the glass teat.

Re:B5 on iTMS, cropped and cropped again

B5 was shot widescreen. The CG was rendered 4:3. I believe part of the deal was that the CG would be rerendered for the DVD's (but I'm not positive).

Warner lost the model files. Many conspiracy theories surround this.

The DVD's were made by combining the 16:9 live action footage with CG that was cropped to 16:9, then scaled vertically (to achieve full anamorphic resolution). So scenes that combine live action and CG look a bit weird.

If iTunes is 4:3, it's probably the original broadcast version, where you're missing the sides of the field in live action shots.

(This is an entirely different issue from the first Sci-fi "widescreen" reairing, where they did indeed mess up and just mat out the top and bottom of the original broadcast.)

Alas, Babylon

It won't be the same without G'Kar, one of my two favorite characters.

Re:Alas, Babylon

You are correct, it would not be the same without Andreas Katsulas, who died of lung cancer on Feb. 13 of this year. Similarly, the death of Richard Biggs, who played Dr. Franklin, should not go unmourned. He died of an aortic tear back in 2004.

Re:Alas, Babylon

It's the mark of the impact of a series when you mourn the passing of actors on them as if they were your family. Babylon 5 was so well constructed and intricate that the characters had real depth, and you felt like you knew them, and by way of that, the actors. I'm hoping these stories work; I know JMS won't dilute the franchise the wat Star Trek has been reduced to pitiful ruins.

Re:Alas, Babylon

Not that he was a major character, but Tim Choate also passed away a few years ago. Luckily he's survived by his brothers Zathras, Zathras, Zathras, and Zathras.

What JMS should do

Strazinski could still do a G'Kar story, showing the effects of G'Kar's travels around the galaxy. G'Kar himself wouldn't actually have to appear.

Exciting

I'm definately excited to hear this news! I recently dusted off some of my old B5 tapes and the show still rocks. I used to love it when I was about 17 and it's still awesome today. I'd watch it every week wth some friends.

I never realized how popular it was 500 mil in DvD sales, thats pretty darn good.

Not quite 20 minutes.

It won't be 20 minutes, acording to B5 creator JMS. From a usenet post [google.com] by him:

No, it's closer to one-half-hour per story, so figure about 75-90 minutes per DVD, plus additional material adding up to a two-hour DVD. jms

I for one am looking forward to this tremendously. I know that all the previous B5 spin-offs have been rather anti-climatic, abortive affairs (although I haven't seen nearly all of it), but the creative freedom he is getting seems rather amazing. As opposed to, say, Crusade, that according to JMS suffered from a death by studio interference. And having seen some of the memos that were leaked, I see no reason to doubt him.

Cashing in

I liked the Babylon 5 series just fine, but it had an ambitious overarching plot which did advance over time, albeit slowly and vaguely, that made it a bit more interesting than an ordinary space opera. Shows about the past of the characters sounds mainly like a way to milk the cash cow represented by the most diehard fanboys and anyone who doesn't have any, whaddayacallem, standards. It doesn't require much creative effort in terms of plot, it's just exploiting the franchise.

"Our Favorite Characters" - Your pics?

I'm betting that the series will be about Sheridan's actions during the Earth-Minbari war. That would provide sufficient eye-candy and war drama for a plot, while at the same time confining the characters to those of primarily human or Minbari origin, keeping G'Kar out of the picture (RIP Mr. Katsulas). Also, during this time frame, Stephen Franklin was galavanting around the galaxy learning about xenobiology, so this war setting would also keep his character out of the picture (RIP. Mr. Biggs).

one of the best shows ever

This series rocked, in its day. I'm not willing to say it was the best thing on TV ever, but i think it makes the top 5. Actions taken by characters had consequences, and fundamentally changed their relationships with other characters - not a static universe where a new episode happened every week but nothing fundamentally changed. It was a realistic world, where characters needed money to live, and there was greed, and corruption, and crime, and an underworld. There were complex characters - even the bad guys were not "one dimensional" - they had their own agendas and loyalties and were not presented as some simplistic "pure evil". Semi-decent newtonian mechanics for spaceships.

It was good stuff. And although the special effects look dated now, at the time, it was amazing to see battles with 100 separate ships on TV - that kinda thing had been reserved for the movies up until then.

If it doesn't include Claudia Christian...

as a "former stripper" then I'm not interested.

I just realized that I wasted a good bit of 1994+ on that show :)

B5 v BG

I'm sorry, but I can't watch Babylon 5 anymore.

Battlestar Galactica has raised the bar, for me, personally, so high that most other sci-fi fare looks and sounds like scrapings from the bottom of a barrel. I realize and understand that the two shows have completely different themes, styles, etc., but the differences in production values and acting quality are especially marked.

The same goes for Stargate (any version), Firefly, and Enterprise or even the new Dr. Who.

I'm not judging anyone who still likes those shows or saying I don't like them anymore. BG has just completely changed my perception of what sci-fi can and should be.

Re:B5 v BG

I think I must be the only person left on this planet who thinks that BSG is massively overrated. That's not to say it's not good, but I just really can't see why everyone sees it as some kind of Sci-fi messiah.

Re:B5 v BG

I think I must be the only person left on this planet who thinks that BSG is massively overrated.

You're not. I agree that it's a good show, certainly one of the best sci-fi offerings of recent years, but I don't buy all the "whole new level" stuff.

I think because sci-fi was very tame, good-guys-always-winning fare for so long, some of the recent, more realistic shows like BSG have carried more weight with the viewer. This is partly because the plots are more credible and the characters can present a wider range of emotions, of course, but I reckon it's also -- in part -- simple novelty value. Of course, BSG wasn't the first to do this; indeed, Babylon 5 itself might have a fair claim on that honour.

In any case, playing with Gritty Realism(TM) is not automatically the same as acting well, and other series have had gritty characters, too. Sure, not every sci-fi actor is waiting for their Oscar, but I would put many of those in B5 up against any of the cast of the new BSG when it comes to portraying a character of substance and interest. G'Kar remains, IMHO, the deepest character of any sci-fi show, and the B5 cast as a whole was easily the equal of other good sci-fi shows like Firefly or BSG.

The thing about BSG is that, at least through series one (I'll watch series two when they bring them all out in one DVD box set instead of messing around with half-series) it was almost all pain and suffering and grief and loss. Where was the light relief, the inspirational breakthrough, the hope, the joy? I remember one scene, at the end of one episode, when a very significant number is increased by one, and that's about it.

Having a plot that involves loss and suffering may bring more credibility, but it can be just as one-dimensional as the good-guys-always-winning if not handled well: credibility is not the same as killing off major characters indiscriminately or using the threat of wiping out the whole human race as your primary plot device. Some of the most moving episodes of Babylon 5 involved tragic fates for noble characters, but none of them was sacrificed randomly; compare and contrast with what happens in Firefly/Serenity (remember to mark those spoilers if you're replying). And of course, Babylon 5 was ultimately a story of hope, while BSG to date is more a story of survival without hope.

So yes, BSG is a good series, and by TV sci-fi standards it's one of the best. But based on the first series, I think it's too negative and one-dimensional in its approach so far, and in that respect it has a lot to learn from classics like Babylon 5.

I can only say one thing...

...is there anything like a good prequel?

You have Star Wars, I think they were considering Star Trek: Junior Hi... eh, Starfleet Academy. As if Enterprise wasn't bad enough where they jumped way past the TOS technology in half a season. In fact there already was a B5 spin-off TV series (Crusade) that had a lot more potential.

Well crap

Eventually a show has to end, and Bab5 ended very well with only a few after series spin-off-death-throes. Trying to bring back to life Frankenstien is not always a good idea. Bab5 was great, it ended great, its time to let it go. If you want to Rez something go talk to the browncoats.

What about Andreas Katsulas?

He passed away earlier this year.

Prepare for dissapointment

I think some people have a romanticised image of Babylon 5.

Bear in mind that, at the time, the only other Sci-Fi on Tv was Star Trek: The Next Generation. That was not a good show. So B5 didn't exactly have to work much to stand out as the best thing on TV.

It performed a function of breaking the Star Trek stranglehold. It showed people sci-fi could have more depth. But compared to some of what came after (Firefly, Battlestar Galactica, new Dr. Who) it is nothing special.

Its like people saying Citizen Kane was the best movie ever. It was certainly better than anything that came out at the time - but since then others have taken its ideas and improved upon them. Same for B5

Re:Prepare for dissapointment

I have to say you're wrong about that. My image isn't romanticized, it's fresh in my memory (I'll kill a weekend ever few months watching the first four seasons).

The main thing fans usually praise about B5 is the incredible story arc. Four seasons planned ahead from day 1. It's impressive. But B5 had something I find even more important, the same thing that made Firefly great before Whedon ruined it: Characters and the way they interacted.

The best example, I think any B5 fan will agree, had to be the chemistry between Andreas Katsulas(R.I.P.) (G'Kar) and Peter Jurasik(Londo). But there were very few poor characters. Walter Koenig as Bester makes you want to punch him in the mouth, but that's because he's SUPPOSED to. Ivanova's monologues on C&C were always good for a wry grin ("No boom today. Boom tommorow. ALWAYS Boom tommorow.") Maybe I'm just fanboying, but I even found Bruce Boxleitner to be an excellent choice for Sheridan.

dissapointed

Babylon 5 is hardly "back." Direct to DVD 20 minute character episodes hardly qualify as any sort of ressurection. As for the greatest sci-fi TV series of all time, for me it's a no-brainer: Doctor Who. And I'm not talking about the newer episodes, I'm taking about the series as a whole. Babylon 5 was great but it didn't instill the sort of eternal love that series like Doctor Who (and even Star Trek: the Next Generation to some degree) have. To this very day if I walked outside and saw a Dalek or Patrick Stewart I would shit my pants, a creature or actor from Babylon 5, not so much.

That having been said those are my personal picks, I'm sure that for many Babylon 5 fans it's quite the other way around. I enjoyed the series, it just wasn't spectacular for me. I've never seemed to truly favor station-based series, I prefer travelers like the Enterprise, the Tardis, the Stargate, etc. I also was not impressed by the special effects in Babylon 5, they were actually kind of crappy. Much crappeir than those in Star Trek: the Next Generation if you ask me. The plot and the actors in Babylon 5 were both very important to me and they screwed them both up pretty bad as the series progressed. In show like Star Trek and Doctor Who the plot really doesn't matter too much, as long as they're still flying around having crazy adventures it's all good.

Actually I'm kind of pissed at the new Doctor Who. Not having any Daleks or any Time Lords (besides the Doctor of course) pretty much kills my two favorite races. I'm informed they can't really not have any more Dalek episodes though, after all, the man does travel through time and the Daleks are his greatest enemy. He's bound to run into Daleks in the past.

I'm also pissed at Stargate, mostly at the retirement of you-know-who. What ever that dude from Farscape's name is needs to die. He's like one of those kids I always wanted to punch in the face while playing football. He's not a good replacement for the offbeat Colonel at all. The new general is also a poor replacement for General Hamond. He seems more like one of those nameless military types you'd see in one scene of a movie - he looks and sounds the part but he has no personality. I don't mind the crazy lady because she's, well, crazy but her Farscape boyfriend has got to go (or start acting less annoying).

Babylon 5 was okay

But what I really want to see revived is Space Above and Beyond. A far superior series to almost all the series mentioned above, well ahead of its time, and killed far too soon by a dumbass Fox.

For Babylon 5

Babylon 5, love it or hate it. After few episodes you are addicted anyways.

One episode doesnt give you any reason to be addicted, two gives you something, after three episodes you cant wait to see fourth, after fourth you find yourself thinking how PPG's really work, after fifth you have lost the count.

Think about a show that has 110 episodes + pilot, where each and every episode are somehow connected. And I dont mean only those episodes that comes in a row, for example 18,19 and 20 would be connected, but I also mean episodes 8 and 75, 53 and 106... 106 and 75... 75 to each and every episode... etc... That is why I love this show, it only gets better more you watch it.

After few episodes you can see the unavoidable faith of Babylon 5 and how the show is going to end, and that I think is the point of the story. You are given certain hints about the future, but you cant know whether it is true or not, or is it even possible.
It is your job to find out.

When the story continues, more hints are brought up, more moving parts inside machinery, more fire to the wheel. And most of all, you can see how the actions in the past had a consequence in the future (Or in the past...:).

In series finale, you will realise how wrong you were time to time, and how great journey this series was. For the last minutes you can only cry for two reasons, because it is over, or just because you want to.

Go get the DVD's, this show is definitely worth it.

Sci-Fi That's Better

Yes, for its time B5 raised the bar on Sci-Fi the way Battlestar Galactica does now. The stories were well written, often interwoven with one another, and the characters were very complex. Even the villains are more than just "one dimensional" pure evil that needed to be destroyed (I beliece someone else also expressed this point).

What hurt shows like ST: Voyager, Enterprise and so many others is that they let the exec interfere with the creative process. Fox wanted more sex on Voyager so they brought in Seven-of-Nine, though Jeri Ryan proved that she was more than just a nice set of boobs and was actually a very good actress. Oh, and don't get me started with T'Pal on Enterprise. She was a good actress also but she was cast for the role because she was top heavy. I'm not saying sex in Sci-Fi isn't bad, but its when the focus of the show is to show off some babe in a skin tight body suit I'd rather watch the Playboy channel. I want my sci-fi shows to have depth, and I'm not alone in this. Sadly, too many media execs think they know what we want even then we tell them what we want. Case in point; the fans demanded for a series featuring Sulu as the captain of the Excellceor, but they gave everyone Enterprise because that is what the execs thought was what was best for the fans rather than listening to what the fans asked for. They're doing it again with the new Star Trek movie. Yes, they are going ahead with the Starfleet Academy things where a young Kirk meets Spock at the academy.

I also agress that Dr. Who was a great series. It is on record, with Guiness, as the longest running Sci-Fi TV series in history. Despite have an almost non-existant budget the producers of the series were still able to tell provocative stories which were sometimes totally unheard of in TV Sci-Fi. The new series does follow a similar formula though I'm disappointed a little by the fact that they dumped the serialization of the episodes.

Into The Fire

What would be really interesting would be if they could use the footage of the main characters shot for the unreleased game Babylon 5: Into The Fire [firstones.com] and work it into these prequels somehow. I've always wanted to see that footage - and, besides, it includes some unreleased and unseen video of Andreas Katsulas as G'Kar.

innovative content production and distribution

I think of this B5 direct to DVD as another innovation by JMS. The 5 season story arc was pretty innovative esp. as all other TV at the time (and still) was so episodic. I see LOST and the 4400 suffering without a defined end. Similarly, BSG may become problematic as plot lines drag and get extended for profit rather than story-telling. And with all the different media playback, what does it matter if it's on TV at such and such a time? I get a much better experience watching the shows uninterrupted, all at once (or at least on my own time schedule). I can see content-on-demand like this being much more popular and it bypasses TV execs (phooey on FOX) so how can that be bad? If only Firefly can be brought back like this ...

Sorry, but...

Sorry, but I've moved on to Battlestar Galactica.

one screenwriter?

One of B5's strenghts and weaknesses is that Straczynski wrote most
of the episodes. That allowed more continuity and long arcs.
However that can hamper the series too. With multiple writes, some
may be stronger in dialog or humor, or just inject fresh views on things.

BSG vs B5

Since a lot of this thread deals with BSG raising the bar and how it outclasses B5 I'd like to weigh in on the issue.

BSG is good. I like it. My TiVo likes it too. It has raised the bar. (Though I think the script is terrible and discontinous and the acting isn't very good. But overall concept and production are excellent and there isn't always a status quo.

Take for example the season finale... "And a year later...". BAH! lazy writers!.

But B5, now talk about raising the bar. It had a comprehensive five year plot (sure, a few episodes were sidetracks/deadends), No status quos, way deeper characters than BSG has, fantastic CGI with realistic physics and all the actors were good if not outstanding.

When people are talking about BSG raising the bar you have to realize that it aired ten years after B5 (almost 10% of the time film has been around and 25% of the time computers have been common.) Does BSG have better CGI? Better production? sure. But B5 essentially did all of what BSG does, did it ten years earlier and did it before anyone else thought of it; at least all in one show.

While BSG may be an evolution in Sci-Fi, B5 was a revolution.

But what about....

Someone doing more than just MENTIONING the Telepath War???
I want to see more Pat Tallman kicking ass...

Best parody song/video EVER

http://www.tomsmithonline.com/freestuff/viddio/b5- 5y.mpg [tomsmithonline.com] http://www.tomsmithonline.com/freestuff/viddio/b5- 5y.avi [tomsmithonline.com]

Rising Stars TV series

Of the newly announced JMS projects [delphiforums.com], I'm more excited about the potential Rising Stars TV series based on the excellent comic book series JMS wrote. This project will be developed by Sam Raimi's company.

3 characters' actors dead

Zathras we can ignore, but G'kar and Dr. Franklin are major characters.

The story's told. It might be time to let it lie.

Why argue which is better?

It seems like about half this thread is arguing about which SF TV series is best. Why? Can't you like different shows simultaneously? Yes, maybe you can only spend your money on a limited number -- but then, why do you have to try to convince everyone else to spend their money a certain way? Why can't we all just relax and say "We're all cool and we all like SF TV"? Why don't we all talk about why all these shows are cool instead of instantly starting to compare dicks?

w000t!

YAY!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't wait! *sigh* I'm still such a groupie after all these years. Maybe we can get SciFi to run them in a block. Right.

Re:Woot!

With apologies to Star Trek fans everywhere, I agree.

Re:Woot!

You want better FX?? You realize that the show is over 10 years old now, right? The kind of weekly FX they did for that show blew everything else the hell out of the water, and opened the door for the kind of modern FX today that seems to have spoiled you with some sort of hindsight bias disease. Heck, that show had better weekly FX than some of the feature length movies of the day, with much a smaller budget.

As for "Comes the Inquisitor," JMS acknowledged [midwinter.com] that he had a braino. His words:

What happened is...basically...Joe is a moron.

I did my research. I called up the info on the encyclopedia, got all the dates right, and my eyes saw East End and for whatever stupid, idiotic reason, my fingers typed West instead of East, and nobody, NObody, caught it until now. I'd loop it, but alas the line is on his face, and it'd look real stupid, and the delivery is *so* perfect as it is; if we looped it, we'd destroy it.

So I content myself with the notion that it's west...of B5.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go shoot myself.

That kind of commitment is what made B5 great. Not to mention the fact that JMS essentially blogged about the show long before that word could have been invented, since there wasn't even a WWW yet. He took fan feedback from the blog, and incorporated it into the show. That's a rarity, even today. Voting people off a TV show doesn't even come close to the level of interaction JMS had with the B5 fanbase.

Re:Woot!

You've obviously never seen Red Dwarf.

Re:Woot!

It has the distinction of being possibly the best planned series of any kind in history. From what I've read, they had the entire 5 year story arc fully plotted out before they started shooting the first episode of season 1. Sure they had to wing it on a few things where there were unforseen circumstances, but for the most part it's a stunning example of what you can do when you actually planned the full 5 seasons, and managed to actually produce all five of them before someone dropped the axe and made you rush your plot to close in like, season 3 or 4.

I have the entire box set of all seasons, and I still enjoy watching it from the start. Time and time again I spot something, some subtle hint, puzzling comment, even a look from a character in reaction to something seemingly harmless, only to realize "oh .... THAT'S why he did that!!", remembering that would tie in maybe an entire season or two later as a very important plot arc. Good lord, how long did they push that "there is a hole in your mind!" before letting us in on it?

I rather doubt these new minis will be very good, as most of the time such similar minis are almost worthless, but I'll probably still watch them, if nothing else than to revisit the past. I'm sure they willl continue to backfill missing or mysterious plot elements from the original series with these new additions, and that alone should be worth the watch.

Re:Woot!

It has the distinction of being possibly the best planned series of any kind in history

Science Fiction folks need to understand that there have only been a half dozen SF series worth criticizing. Babylon 5 was certainly one of the best SF series, but when you consider the number of excellent mainstream TV shows, such as Hill Street Blues (which Babylon 5, like so many ensemble shows, owes much of its structure to) it has to compete with, which were both stunningly well planned and executed, B5 pales in comparison.

Yes, B5 had a five year story arc, but when it had to be compressed into four years it suffered badly. They then cobbled together a lackluster fifth season. Better shows have developed arcs which could cope with being axed after the first year or running indefinitely. And Babylon 5's pace was glacial for much of its first three seasons.

These 20 minute shows could be good, but I wouldn't hold my breath. I doubt they started out pitching for a 20 minute direct to DVD project; so this is a TV series pitch that they couldn't sell.

Watching scifi for the acting...

...is like reading Playboy for the articles.

B5? Excuse Me? X-Files

X-Files Hands Down

Re:Woot!

If you go to ZHaDum You Will DIE!

I just dont know when.

Re:Woot!

B5 has my vote for best SF series.

I think there is a typo here. You accidentally typed "B5" instead of "BG".

-Eric

Re:I can still dream, can't I?

Not a real fan of Babylon 5, but give rise to hope that someday, Firefly will get similar treatment. (Why SciFi didn't pick up that series after FOX dumped it, I'll never know.)

Best guesses why SciFi didn't want Firefly:
1) Production costs were too high.
2) Production costs weren't unreasonable for a show of this type, but SciFi didn't have the money for another series with this kind of costs. Please keep in mind that Battlestar Gallactica has little in the way of "eye candy", which really helps to keep its costs down.
3) Realization that despite the fact that Firefly fans were truly devoted to the show, there just weren't enough of them. The box office returns on the movie (I don't even remember the name of it) should have been proof of this.

Given what SciFi did to Sliders, which at one time was a good show, I wouldn't bet on Firefly remaining as good as it supposedly was when Fox ran it. Everyone seems to forget that Sliders just got worse and worse on SciFi. The series final was so bad that I don't care if there is ever another episode. I won't watch it. I won't even watch Sliders in reruns or rent the DVDs, this how pissed off I still am at how the series finale went down. SciFi could have just as easily have destroyed Firefly if they had bought it.

The "best" sci-fi series

The "best" sci-fi series would probably be one that has more mass appeal. More like, say, Red Dwarf or X-Files. Or Knight Rider (that was SF).

Re:Wow. I wonder...

Wow. You must not have seen the same episodes that I was watching...so you're saying that Andreas Katsulas, Mira Furlan and Peter Jurasik couldn't act. Astounding...*shakes head*

Re:US only :/

B5 video tapes are sold in my local Eurosaver store for 2 euros each. That should be sufficient to figure what their commercial worth is these days.

Re:Wow. I wonder...

"(the security guy.)"

You mean Jerry Doyle? He's now a talk radio host. http://www.jerrydoyle.com/ [jerrydoyle.com]

Re:Thirdspace

It was one of the first shows to be shot in 16:9 before there was HDTV!

Yes. A pity though that much of the CGI shots were rendered 4:3 and had to be cropped for widescreen. Or at least when it was shown on the Sci-Fi Channel in widescreen for the first time.

The series is preloaded in my 400-disc DVD changer but I haven't watched them yet.

Re:Wow. I wonder...

Seriously, there was only one person on the entire show who could act (the security guy.)

Well, let me open by saying that Mira Furlan (or however you spell it) displayed no acting ability whatsoever on that show. In fact, what I took away from her character was mostly that she had a perpetually dry mouth.

However, Garibaldi's actor (forget his name) should not be held up as an example of acting. He came in to the studio and JMS said "that's garibaldi". The guy is just being himself. That doesn't mean he can't act, just that he didn't have to do so much of it for this show. Sure, he had to act out situations, but not so much a character.

Point for point

Seconded. Consider:

• 5 year story arc
• Associated with the point above, foreshadowing happens years in advance
• Ships appear to follow newtonian mechanics in regular space
• Humans at "reasonable" technological level (none of this "aging / unaging people with the transporter" shit. I don't care how altruistic the Federation is supposed to be. If it's possible to reverse aging with the transporter, someone would exploit it.)
• Not all major races magically at the same level of technological development
• Babylon 5 was never turned into Enterprise.

Babylon 5 gets my vote, hands down.

Re:Wow. I wonder...

Name me one science fiction show that had better actors. ST:TNG came close and Avery Brooks was pretty good in DS9, but one of the reasons B5 was successful in my eye was that the acting was actually decent, and in many cases genuinely impressive. Perhaps even more important was that the cast meshed well. Although I personally liked Jerry Doyle's work in the series, opinions I've read elsewhere usually consider him one of the weaker actors.

Re:Delenn in lost

French? No.

A leading actress of theatre, film and TV in the former Yugoslavia...

Mira Furlan [imdb.com]