Oh, man, the 90's hair!

[terrie]

Been watching Babylon 5. The characters and stories have held up well to time. The CGI and the hair? Not so much. I'm occasionally distracted by thoughts of "What the hell is that thing on her head?" when I see some of the perms.

Comments

[milkshake-b.livejournal.com]

It helps to marathon it. After a while, you forget what modern CGI looks like. (Although if you're computer geeky enough, I understand that you're still impressed. A friend of mine spent a lot of episodes going "THIS IS AMAZING FOR AN AMIGA.") And on the bright side, it's none of it so bad as old Doctor Who serials.

[terrie01.livejournal.com]

The down side to marathoning is that you start to notice that they reuse a lot of CGI scenes. But, yes, the more you watch, the less you notice that it's clunky by modern standards. Of course, I still love "The Last Starfighter" and talk about dated CGI!

[milkshake-b.livejournal.com]

They reused a lot of everything, to keep costs down. In a lot of ways it was more of the British tradition of SF than American: our production values are bare-minimum, we haven't got a lot of explosions, and our guest actors either blow chunks or are freakishly good, but our scripts are excellent. And of course every time I watch it now I have to wonder just how furiously Karl Rove was taking notes.

[terrie01.livejournal.com]

I don't mind reused sets and props. That happens even in American sci-fi. I mean, I swear, there were only two or three corridors on the Enterprise. And you expect a certain amount of filler to be reused. It's just odd when you see a random filler shot of two ships crossing paths and it's the same shot you saw last episode. I would have stuck with a shot of the station. A little less noticeable, due to the lack of action.