Entry tags:
Babylon 5 Rewatch: No Compromises/ The very long night of Londo Mollari
No Compromises
While I'm never quite sure which of the five versions of the credits I prefer, I have to say the opening montage of the s5 sequence, summing up the series, makes me melt into fannish goo.
As season openers go, the episode itself is okay. I wasn't keen on a "lone assassin" plot when the show did it in s3, and I'm not any more now, but it's not badly done by itself, and also provides the excuse for a couple of neat scenes like G'Kar's eventual version of the oath of office. Methinks more heads of state should be sworn in just by being asked "Do you want to be President/Chancellor/Prime Minister?" "Yes.", and leave at that. Saves time and money, I say. The declaration of principles, or what we hear of it, is touching. Now, two decades ago, I remember
![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hobsonphile referring to G'Kar as "the Thomas Jefferson of the Alliance" for this (i.e. that he's the one who drafts said declaration, and ever since, I can't watch the scene where Sheridan asks him without wanting someone to filk "But, Mr. Adams" from "1776" for it.No Compromises introduces two important new characters, Captain Elizabeth Lochley and Byron (Gordon, but we won't learn his last name until a few episodes later - since it's not a big spoiler and actually taken from George Gordon, Lord Byron, I feel free to mention it here). Lochley was resented primarily for not being Ivanova, aka the replacement goldfish syndrome. Byron, otoh, has the dubious honor of competing with Warren Keefer (aka the s2 pilot imposed on JMS by the network) for most disliked B5 character, full stop. (Err, among the characters who aren't meant to be disliked a la Clark or Shakiri.) Now, I like Lochley, though I agree with a self critical JMS that her character doesn't really get fleshed out until the Neil Gaiman episode Day of the Dead. Byron, otoh, I loathed with much of the rest of fandom. (In earlier years, I would have written "all", but since then I actually met a living, breathing Byron fan and saw two others online.) On this rewatch, I was curious to see whether I would still feel the same way. First result: in this particular episode, he does not yet evoke instinctive eyerolling and booing in me. Actually, given that one of the primary complaints about the new LotR show is the lack of long haired elves, I wondered whether one of Byron's most mocked attributes back in the day, his long and always well coiffured hair (not likely for a refuge, but such is tv), would work to his advantage if the show premiered these days. Anyway, Byron: I think one problem is that he's supposed to be incredibly charismatic and the actor just can't convey that, but in his first episode, that's not yet a problem.
What is a problem is that Sheridan first tells Lochley that station business falls under her authority and political business under his, and then decides thath offering telepaths B5 space isn't station business, it's political business. OTOH, what he doesn't do is making an actual political move to change the situation for telepaths on Earth which is at the root of this. Note that apparantly, freedom for Mars was on the wish list Luchenko was presented with. Equal rights for telepaths was not. Or even a commission looking into their situation. Instead, Sheridan continues to think like a military man, i.e. Psi Corps bad, we need some "good" telepaths of our own to fight the bad telepaths when the inevitable telepath war happens. So he not only overrides Lochley after he just promised not to and she is still in the process of establishing her authority on the station as a newcomer, he also shows himself completely clueless about what the new fact he's just created (rogue telepaths officially on B5, a station still run by an Earthforce Captain who has to follow Earth law) will necessitate and how to deal with the telepath situation in the long term. In short, we get our first example that Sheridan may be a brilliant leader, but he's really anything but brilliant as a President, and what used to frustrate me so much in the past was that the narrative refuses to acknowledge this.
The Lochley/Garibaldi antagonism set up here gets an excellent emotional pay off eventually, and it works for me both in that Garibaldi very noticably seems to feel he needs to prove his loyalty (and save Sheridan's life repeatedly) 100% all the time after last year's trauma, and that Lochley would see in him spoiler spoiler spoiler. What I do regret is that the show after this episode's set up never quite uses the chance to explore via Lochley, a main character in s5, what it had been to be on the "other side" without being a Clark fan as much as I wanted it to. As I mentioned in the spoilery space of my "No Surrender, No Retreat" review and now can mention without spoilery space, that particular s4 episode would have been an ideal way to introduce Lochley inconspiciously as one of the captains neither firing on civilians nor siding with Sheridan, but as JMS did not yet know he'd get a fifth season, I mean that not as a critique but as wistful "might have been".
The Very Long Night of Londo Mollari
Which is one of my all time favourite episodes, both of the show in general and of that weird subgenre which seemed to be everyone at one point in the later 1990s - the episode that mainly (or exclusively) takes place in the head of one of the main characters. While not as anarchicly inventive as Farscape's Won't Get Fooled Again and miles better than Distant Voices in DS9, this take on the trope, as opposed to, say, Normal Again in BtVS (which is beautifully played but doesn't impact Buffy's character development) to me is so good because it does something which was really necessary: confront Londo with the full enormity of what he's done, and in a way that answers "does he regret only because, as Head!G'Kar puts it, he got caught, he inadvertendly almost got Centauri Prime destroyed, or does he regret his dees, full stop, and acknowledges full responsibility?"
I've seen this episode quite often, and I'm impressed every time, both by the big moments, main themes, and the tiny details, such as the indications Londo's subconscious transforms what people in the "real" world are saying in his earshot, such as Delenn's "almost certainly not!" (in reply to Sheridan's "if there's anything I can do" re: the Lennier situation) to a reply to Londo asking Head!Delenn whether anyone on Centauri Prime would really regret his demise if he died now. Or the way Head!Sheridan's outfit keeps changing, showing both the past (Sheridan in Earth Force uniform, in a shirt as he was during the big Earth breakup episodes, in the new B5 uniforms created by the Minbari) and the future (Sheridan in ranger gear, which is not something he's worn on the show yet, and then Sheridan transforming into a light creature as the future!humans did at the end of Deconstruction of Falling Stars), thus providing additional fodder for my headcanon that Londo has a bit more than the avarage Centauri precognition. It's also intriguing that he sees Delenn as a prophetess/soothsayer (the equivalent of Lady Morella), yet dresses her in black (which for humans associates widow's weeds, but not for Centauri or Minbari - it is, however, associative of Londo himself switching from purple to black in his clothing choices from s2 onwards).
But most of all, I love what those scenes in Londo's subconscious say about his relationships with Vir, G'Kar and with his own conscience. If you've ever wondered whether the fact Vir remained with him truly made a difference to Londo before the plot against Cartagia, wonder no more. The discussion between Londo and Head!Vir not only answers a few questions as to how much the Centauri ability to dream of their deaths is seen as predestination by them (as head!Vir says, "prophecy is a guess which comes true" and that if it doesn't, it remains a metaphor, so if Londo died tomorrow, his death dream would be just this, a metaphor), but it shows Londo finding the strength to finally turn around, face his past/G'Kar via Vir. The reply to his question whether it wouldn't be better to die now than to endure the fate he dreams of and has feared for so long is that Vir would miss him, and that, in the end, makes him want to live and to face his responsiibilities. "Londo lives for Vir" is how strong their relationship has become.
But while Vir can give Londo the strength to face his deeds, it does have to be (head!) G'Kar who strips away the excuses, just as it has to be G'Kar to whom Londo finally voices his "I'm sorry" (and not just in the dream but after waking up, thus finally fulfilling Emperor Turhan's statement to Franklin that there won't be hope for the Centauri until the Emperor of the Centauri tells a Narn on this station "I'm sorry"). What Londo's mind/soul/subconscious picks from his many deeds is also telling:
1) The bombardment of the Narn Homeworld with mass drivers. (Let me add that I assume this stands in for the entire second occupation as well.) This is something Londo may not have ordered, but which he went along with and thus supported, and there's a reason why the clip of his face watching this remained in the ever changing credits through several seasons. It's also something that concerns all the Narn, not just an individual.
2.) G'Kar's torture by Cartagia. This, otoh, is something that's strictly about G'Kar. And yes, Londo in this particular event was already working towards getting rid of Cartagia, and protesting would not have helped, but that's not the point. The event is standing in, I would say, for all of Londo's behaviour towards G'Kar, and that Londo feels guilty about this inside instead of justifying it to himself as he justified it to other people by saying it's just politics, G'Kar is the representative of his people's enemy, etc. is pretty telling about how intensely personal their relationship is and always has been for them.
Note that neither event is about the Centauri. Obviously, Londo WAS shocked about what Cartagia meant for the Centauri when meeting him at the start of s4, knowing Cartagia would not be on the throne without Refa and himself, but he didn't need a heart attack to make him see that, and he's dealt with it. And that neither event is about the Centauri does answer the question as to whether Londo's regrets are solely caused by his awareness he nearly destroyed Centauri Prime by his ambitions, or whether he feels guilty for what his deeds meant to the Narn as well.
Trivia: Andreas Katsulas has great fun playing G'Kar playing Cartagia, wouldn't you say? I can see why they didn't get Worthan Krimmer back for just this scene and used clips from the s4 episode plus the new footage, and honestly, I don't wish it another way.
On to the Minbari subplot. "On Minbar, three are sacred." On the one hand, this statement of Delenn's - which is meant entirely seriously, unlike Sheridan's attempt at a joke afterwards - could mean the Minbari partnershipi arrangements are not necessarily limited to a pairing of two, and some fanfiction ran with that assumption. Otoh, Lennier definitely doesn't seem to believe he could join Delenn and Sheridan in a marraige, that this is an option. Though I suppose you could handwave that aside by saying Lennier is aware Sheridan wouldn't go for it and would insist on a human style marriage of two.
In any event, as of this episode, it is canon that Delenn does know how Lennier feels about her. That she still wants to keep him at her side, while it is Lennier who tries the long distance solution, either means she does think living as three is an option or that she thinks he'll work through it. Most definitely, it means she does not want to be without Lennier in her life. Self centred? Probably. Betraying an emotional need that is not satisfied by her relationship with Sheridan alone? Possibly. If Marcus was Galahad, Lennier is Lancelot. Delenn isn't Guinevere in that B5 does not do adultery as a storyline, but she is the Queen who wants to keep her knight.
The other episodes
no subject
Mostly, I sort of find this particular flaw of Delenn's, where she chooses to see the world in a certain way and then sticks with it until the consequences are nearly catastrophic, deeply fascinating and very consistent.
Speaking of flaws, I completely agree that the show shows us John does not get off on a strong foot as president but wants us to think otherwise, which is so annoying to me. Because, as I'm sure I've said before, it would have been interesting to see him make these mistakes with the POV that they are mistakes, because the transition from military governor to democratically-ish elected leader is really hard. And then we could haven seen him grow.
Oh well. I tend to think of S5 as a sketch outline of something that could have been great if it had been given the same time to percolate as S1-4, and it has some truly phenomenal moments -- including, as you note, Londo's whole arc, that really gets rooted here. More later, spoilers, etc.
(But I, like everyone else, truly hate Byron. I am impressed you have found a Byron fan in the wild! I recently rewatched this season *twice,* so I feel that I have enough information to make an informed decision about my dislike.)
no subject
No Compromises: I also was not that excited about the lone assassin storyline. I liked Lochley a lot and I hope I can go on continuing to like her! I loved that she was snarky and different enough from Ivanova that she had her own character, and that she was on the side of Earth -- but the way she phrased it made it sound like she still could have been on either side (although I suppose that she was also saying that she was on the "side" of Clark). I didn't dislike Byron.
Actually, given that one of the primary complaints about the new LotR show is the lack of long haired elves, I wondered whether one of Byron's most mocked attributes back in the day, his long and always well coiffured hair (not likely for a refuge, but such is tv), would work to his advantage if the show premiered these days.
Heh, this was sort of my reaction -- I wondered if Byron was pandering to the teenage girl demographic. I didn't think to tie it to LotR elves, though!
What is a problem is that Sheridan first tells Lochley that station business falls under her authority and political business under his, and then decides thath offering telepaths B5 space isn't station business, it's political business.
This drove me NUTS. Not only is it bad politics (very bad politics! You've got to work with new!Earthgov, not decide you can trample all over it!) but also just on a personal level isn't very nice, to go back on his promise. If Ivanova was originally slated to be the new B5 station commander under Earthgov authority, I guess I'm glad that she didn't get a chance for this to happen to her, as it would have been the first time he'd gone back on his word to her and not told her the truth. (And as
Relatively minor compared to that, but also I would like to know what kind of politician worth their salt does not read the vows they are going to take before they take them -- especially given they were written by one party which has strong long-standing grudges against other parties in the Alliance (I kept having visions of G'Kar putting in something like "I, John Sheridan, pledge to do my utmost to help the worlds of the Alliance, except for the Centauri who are a bunch of rat-bastards," and it spiraling down from there) -- which Sheridan was absolutely about to do. So far very not impressed by his political acumen.
Teaser for second episode (though I imagine you've probably seen it): in the end I couldn't wait for this post and posted about my perception of Delenn's problems here.
no subject
Mostly, I sort of find this particular flaw of Delenn's, where she chooses to see the world in a certain way and then sticks with it until the consequences are nearly catastrophic, deeply fascinating and very consistent.
It does fit with her breaking up the Grey Council (necessary in this particular situation, absolutely) but not expecting any of the fallout despite the tensions between the castes and the fact no alternative new ruling body was left behind after her action, or earlier than that, her surprise at the Council responding badly to her defying their collective opinion as voiced in „Babylon Squared“ in order to go ahead with the prophecy.
Speaking of flaws, I completely agree that the show shows us John does not get off on a strong foot as president but wants us to think otherwise, which is so annoying to me. Because, as I'm sure I've said before, it would have been interesting to see him make these mistakes with the POV that they are mistakes, because the transition from military governor to democratically-ish elected leader is really hard. And then we could haven seen him grow.
Same here. I wouldn‘t be irritated if I thought the narrative wants us to see him making mistakes, which, as you say, would be understandable, given that being a military leader and being a political one are two very different professions, and he has no training for the later. (The way G‘Kar‘s scheming and high handedness in s1 backfires on him in early s2 when the Narn in general and he and particular direly need allies, to say nothing of Londo‘s entire arc. Naturally Sheridan‘s mistakes her aren‘t on the same scale as Londo asking Morden for an attack on a Narn outpost, I mean the general principle of showing a character doing something wrong with complete awareness this is what it is and that this character will face the consequences and learn.) But even during the original broadcast back in the day, between the way Garibaldi‘s criticism of him in early s4 turned out to have been the result of mind messing and the strawmen and -woman historians being shown to be superficial and in the wrong when condemming him in „The Deconstruction of Falling Stars“, I had a sinking feeling we were supposed to think „Sheridan yes!“ at this point, and alas…
Byron: you won‘t hear a defense from me, I remember my dislike all too well. Just that I didn‘t feel the same instinctive loathing this time in the first episode! It will probably return later on. If not, I will report it. And yes, you can imagine my amazement when the daughter of a friend (sixteen at the time) said she loved Byron. Just goes to show: in fandom, one should never state that „everyone“ hates or loves a character.
no subject
Intentionally, no more so than Marcus or Galen (a character from the spin-off Crusade). But as it happens, the one real life Byron fan I encountered was a teenage girl (sixteen at the time). In fact, the actor playing Byron has been on the show before, in Atonement and the movie In the Beginning (which was broadcast between seasons 4 and 5 and deals with the Earth/Minbari War), playing one of the Minbari and being completely unobjectionable. I think part of the problem is that Byron gets the kind of somewhat purple dialogue - „Sarah, bright and beautiful“ - which you need actors like Andreas Katsulas and Peter Jurasik to carry off, part is (not yet in this episode, but later) that the story he‘s in demands of him that he‘s very charismatic and compelling to a rich variety of characters, and, well, not so much, and lastly, his plot would only have been a subplot if s4 had ended with Sheridan‘s capture and s5 had been developed the normal way but because of the late renewal had to be promoted to main plot of early s5.
Now, a new character in a main plot line doesn‘t have to be a disaster. Cartagia is one in the first six s4 episodes, and it‘s incredibly compelling to watch. But Byron… as I recall, doesn‘t quite work out that way. However, he has one undeniable virtue. A new official rogue telepath colony on B5 demands the return of a certain recurrent character to the scene, which is always welcome. :)
If Ivanova was originally slated to be the new B5 station commander under Earthgov authority, I guess I'm glad that she didn't get a chance for this to happen to her, as it would have been the first time he'd gone back on his word to her and not told her the truth.
Well, to be fair: if Byron and friends had shown up while the Earth Civil War was still going on, i.e. in the subplot to early s5 as originally planned, with Sheridan captured, he wouldn‘t have been in the position to go back on his promise to Ivanova, she‘d have been the one to grant Byron asylum on B5, and with the station still at war with the Clark government, there would not have been an (immediate) conflict. The entire developing telepath situation would have been squarely on Ivanova‘s shoulders, including after peace with Earth.
If Claudia Christian had renewed her contract and been in s5 as developed after it was finally greenlighted, Ivanova still wouldn‘t have gotten Lochley‘s exact storyline (you‘ll soon see which scenes she‘d never have gotten, which are a good way to make Lochley her own character), she‘d have gotten a mixture of Lochley‘s and another character‘s, I‘ll tell you which one later once you‘ve seen the episodes in question. But yes, that would have necessitated Sheridan going back on his word to her for the first time in No Compromises - if, that is, Ivanova would have decided as Lochley does. Which I doubt - presumably Ivanova would have agreed to give Byron & Co. a place on the station.
Relatively minor compared to that, but also I would like to know what kind of politician worth their salt does not read the vows they are going to take before they take them
I could think of at least one President in recent times… To be fair: Sheridan clearly trusts G‘Kar a lot by now. :) But yeah. This could have been a hilarious clusterfuck.
no subject
Although she might have told him to go sit on it if he overruled her :) Or, it could be interesting to see them genuinely clashing over their responsibilities and trying to overcome that, even though I share the same "please no" reaction.
Partly because as people pointed out, some of Sheridan's actions seem a bit contrived to fit what was necessary but not fully explained why it came down to that specifically, which robs any conflict of its foundation.
no subject
It's funny, when I first watched it I wasn't plugged into fandom at all. But I think my first reaction was the same: feeling like I was supposed to like this character but actually thinking he was annoying, aggravating, and creepy. But then I quite quickly talked myself into thinking he was *supposed* to be like that: that the only nucleus the telepaths had to coalesce around was someone driven with an idealistic vision and genuine well-meaning -- but also with the notable flaw of veering 30% "creepy cult leader". It's quite realistic for a good cause to be championed by someone flawed at best.
no subject
One thing I’ve really noticed coming back to watching this after changing career myself to work in government with politicians (albeit as a faceless bureaucrat type myself), is that storylines like “Sheridan is a terrible politician who we are supposed to admire in that role anyway” feel even harder to ignore now and irritate me even more than the first time round.
It’s not even on realism grounds. I am prepared to handwave a lot of things that don’t make immediate sense, like how anyone’s running an embassy with a support staff of 1. And also Sheridan coming into the job with the attitude that all you need here is good intentions and being on the right side is, well, not even that unrealistic as a politician new in to the job! But, what specifically annoys me now is that the narrative takes the view that this really is all he needs, and when it goes wrong it’s because of some minor character flaw on his part (like he’s too trusting/a bit hasty), not because he’s operating entirely outside any kind of decent structure of support and accountability when making decisions that affect other people.
So with setting up Byron’s telepath colony: Granted, it would be pretty boring TV storytelling to do, eg, a whole plot line about multiple different revisions to a Terms of Reference document setting out what is ‘political’ vs ‘station business’. But what we actually get is him making a unilateral decision based on what feels ok to him - “I’m putting this decision in that category.” And this is both an awful way to run the new alliance, and also extends JMS’s ‘great man of history’ approach, which is already irritating enough, to an approach to political decisions where it sits very uncomfortably with me.
no subject
The Sheridan and Lochley thing, I’m surprised they don’t get in their history here and yeah the ending, it’s not so much he overrules her for me. It’s that Lochley’s refusal and Sheridan’s overruling her is only told us in his conversation with Byron. That argument should be between him and Captain Lochley and on-screen.
You can certainly argue that granting asylum to people is in the politics arena but it also requires station resources which is Lochley’s domain. I’m reminded of turf wars like that being the bread and butter of the later nBSG and it would be more even handed about them.
Andreas Katsulas is on fine form in both episodes, I was surprised how comic he was in No Comprises and on it’s on Long Night, he displays at lot of range with the sombre real world G’Kar, the angry and vengeful dream G’Kar and G’Kar as Cartagia on top of it all as well.
I can’t remember if previous seasons convinced me but these episodes really don’t sell me on Sheridan and Delenn’s marriage, there’s just something off about it. When he turns up at the end and puts her arm around her and sort of drags here away after Lennier leaves… seems weird, I’m sure that’s not the intended reaction though.
no subject
and the tiny details, such as the indications Londo's subconscious transforms what people in the "real" world are saying in his earshot, such as Delenn's "almost certainly not!"
Yeah, this was really neat.
Sheridan in ranger gear, which is not something he's worn on the show yet, and then Sheridan transforming into a light creature
Ohhhh I didn't realize that!
(as head!Vir says, "prophecy is a guess which comes true" and that if it doesn't, it remains a metaphor, so if Londo died tomorrow, his death dream would be just this, a metaphor)
This was interesting to me. And it occurred to me that if he'd died of the heart attack, people around him who knew the prophecy would have nodded their heads sagely and said, "yep, the stress from G'Kar and his people was definitely what caused his death, just like in the prophecy."
The reply to his question whether it wouldn't be better to die now than to endure the fate he dreams of and has feared for so long is that Vir would miss him, and that, in the end, makes him want to live and to face his responsiibilities.
This was THE BEST <33333
just as it has to be G'Kar to whom Londo finally voices his "I'm sorry" (and not just in the dream but after waking up, thus finally fulfilling Emperor Turhan's statement to Franklin that there won't be hope for the Centauri until the Emperor of the Centauri tells a Narn on this station "I'm sorry").
Ohhhhh crap, I'd completely forgotten about that!
What do you think (real) G'Kar is thinking when Londo says that at the end? I couldn't help thinking of the elevator scene with him and Vir, and I am sure he's thinking that... but also that he won't, now, say that.
If Marcus was Galahad, Lennier is Lancelot. Delenn isn't Guinevere in that B5 does not do adultery as a storyline, but she is the Queen who wants to keep her knight.
Heh, I am amused that while I didn't make the connection to the King Arthur episode, I also picked up on Lennier being the perfect knight to Delenn :) (And I do think that there is an emotional affair going on, though I appreciate that it never gets physical/sexual.)
I also really liked, now that I think about it more, how this episode points up the parallel between Vir and Londo -- and their frankly amazing love for each other -- and Delenn and Lennier, and their extremely similar but rather more problematic love for each other. I think maybe a large difference here is -- though I feel sorry for Lennier -- Vir sees Londo very clearly, in a way Lennier doesn't see Delenn. He knows that Londo is a mess and has done really terrible things, and while Vir also blames, say, Morden and Cartagia, he also acknowledges the darkness inside of Londo. And he loves him anyway. Lennier, I feel, partially perhaps because of the extremely hierarchical nature of Minbari society, idolizes Delenn and puts her on a pedestal, and lets her push him around without complaint (I mean, because of the particular aide relationship Vir also has to let Londo push him around a lot, but he also speaks up when he doesn't like it), and when he finds out her terrible secret excuses it.
no subject
Yes, Sheridan is an excellent military leader but a terrible political one.
Has the terrible thing (no, the other, other, other terrible thing) that happens to Mollari happened yet (sorry for the vagueness) - because it makes the bit about him living for Vir even truer.
I wonder how much of Delenn not realising that this is torment for Lennier (other than what you say about her and Dukhat below) is her wanting to keep a link to back home.