The Power and the Glitter!

[vultan]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

Oh man that's right -- I had completely forgotten about Overture...

It's all good.

Originally Posted by Glen

A couple things on the TV front.

Agree that it would be good/fitting for a more stable Babylon 5 ITTL to occur, one where the last season isn't so uncertain - keep on Claudia Christian as Ivanova, have the originally intended story order/broadcast.

Would also get bonus points if a darker, edgier Doctor Who television movie comes about that actually relaunches the Doctor Who TV series earlier.

Ideally, this is how the run of Babylon 5 would look: everything the same up until the fourth season, which solely consists of the Shadow War and it's resolution, the resolution of the Earth Civil War in the very last bit of season 4, then the first third or so of season 5, all of the the important plot points of the first half of season 5 (the rogue telepath arc, errr... there wasn't much else) condensed into several episodes at the middle (more than doable) then the Centauri War/Drakh-possession-of-Londo storyline goes more or less as per OTL.

Of course, in a world where entertainment is changed heavily in the 1990's (well, the initial POD is a political one, and the effects don't really trickle down into entertainment until 199), there may be a couple curveballs, some minor changes here and there. No one seemed to notice, after all, that I had Moloch in Watchmen portrayed by Andreas Katsulas, so maybe season 1 on B5 is slightly G'kar-light compared to OTL (not nearly as bad as Data in TNG, but enough to abort that stupid episode where G'kar is targeted for assassination amid all the religious festivals on the station...)

Oh, and as for Doctor Who? We'll see...

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

I've kept meaning to catch up on this ever since Brainbin plugged it. Glad I got around to it.

Intriguing take on things. I especially like the potential for Bruce Campbell ITTL.

And just in time to catch the Oscar Results, too.

Falkenburg

Thank you Falkenburg! (And thank you, Brainbin.)

Yes, Mr. Campbell gets his big break here (fortunate for Hollywood, because I can think of one big actor in the 90's who won't...)

Originally Posted by Kalvan

This is woderful. Keep going

I certainly will!

[Glen]

Originally Posted by vultan

Ideally, this is how the run of Babylon 5 would look: everything the same up until the fourth season, which solely consists of the Shadow War and it's resolution, the resolution of the Earth Civil War in the very last bit of season 4, then the first third or so of season 5, all of the the important plot points of the first half of season 5 (the rogue telepath arc, errr... there wasn't much else) condensed into several episodes at the middle (more than doable) then the Centauri War/Drakh-possession-of-Vir storyline goes more or less as per OTL.

That all works except I think you meant possession-of-Londo.

Of course, in a world where entertainment is changed heavily in the 1990's (well, the initial POD is a political one, and the effects don't really trickle down into entertainment until 199), there may be a couple curveballs, some minor changes here and there. No one seemed to notice, after all, that I had Moloch in Watchmen portrayed by Andreas Katsulas,

Fair, and I forgot about Andreas in Watchmen - I recall seeing it, but it slipped my mind.

so maybe season 1 on B5 is slightly G'kar-light compared to OTL (not nearly as bad as Data in TNG, but enough to abort that stupid episode where G'kar is targeted for assassination amid all the religious festivals on the station...)

Probably not any appreciable amount unless you have greatly increased the amount of screen time Moloch has in the movie.

Oh, and as for Doctor Who? We'll see...

Yes, and we shall be watching, we who watch the watchmen....

Yes, Mr. Campbell gets his big break here (fortunate for Hollywood, because I can think of one big actor in the 90's who won't...)

That's intriguing....

[vultan]

Originally Posted by Glen

That all works except I think you meant possession-of-Londo.

Did I say that? Huh, meant Londo.

[Glen]

Originally Posted by vultan

Did I say that? Huh, meant Londo.

You did, and I thought so....

[vultan]

Originally Posted by Glen

You did, and I thought so....

Yeah, I edited my original post on that.

It was Londo... BUT WHO SAYS IT WILL BE SO IN THIS TIMELINE!?!?!

[Glen]

Originally Posted by vultan

Yeah, I edited my original post on that.

It was Londo... BUT WHO SAYS IT WILL BE SO IN THIS TIMELINE!?!?!

JMS that's who!

[vultan]

March 27th, 1995- Oscar Night

“Showtime,” Leno whispered to no one in particular as he made a final adjustment to his bowtie. He braced himself as the curtains started to rise, and the somewhat unusually deep female voice announced his arrival.

“Ladies and Gentleman, your host for the 67th Annual Academy Awards, JAY LENO!”

To the roaring applause of thousands of attendees, The Tonight Show host made his way onto the stage of the Shriner Auditorium. All of the Hollywood stars were in the house tonight, and Leno was determined to make this the most memorable Oscars Night to date.

“Thank you, thank you! Boy, what a crowd!”, Leno began as the applause died down. “Ladies and gentlemen of the Academy, all the billions of people watching this around the globe, welcome to the 67th Annual Oscars ceremony! Guess this isn’t the right venue for the Aristocrats joke, huh?”

And everything went downhill from there.

…

Notable Oscar Wins

-Best Documentary Feature

It was a tough decision in the minds of many about who should win the award. Backlash would be the logically timely choice [1]. It discussed the return of race baiting as a political tactic in the early 1990’s in the wake of rioting and affirmative action, prominently featuring David Duke, Lester Maddox, George Wallace, Jr., Jesse Helms, and other Southern politicians, as well as the 1988 presidential campaign of George Bush (including the infamous “Willie Horton” ad). The lawsuit Wallace and Helms filed against the producers for being presented in the same vein as Duke and Maddox only served to raise the film’s profile, increasing its chances. Of course, the more well-acclaimed Hoop Dreams, sharing the aspirations of several inner-city African-American high students hoping to become basketball players, also looked like it had a serious chance of taking home the hardware. Maya Lin: A Strong Clear Vision, about the titular artist, and That Wacky Redhead [2], a lighthearted look at the life of actress/producer Lucille Ball, were both considered fine films but lacked the media machines the other three documentaries had surrounding them.

In spite of the competition, no one was really angry when Crumb won. Terry Zwigoff’s masterful look into the story of underground comic artist R. Crumb was a work of art in-and-of itself, and it had the backing of powerful producers David Lynch and Lynch O’Donnell to boot. However, what pushed it over the top was probably the success Watchmen and The Crow had enjoyed the previous year had increased mainstream attention for non-mainstream comics (“Stuff without guys and gals in spandex”, Zwigoff himself would assert), and Crumb’s art was anything but mainstream. The consensus was that this was very much a well-deserved award.

-Best Visual Effects

No contest. Though Stargate impressed some with what it could do with a relatively small budget, and the ability of the SFX team on Forrest Gump to seamlessly incorporate Gump into historical archive footage could not compete with Watchmen. When the ILM wizards had created Doctor Manhattan, they created the first completely computer generated main character in a motion picture, showing just what this new form of special effects could accomplish, and illuminating the shape of things to come.

-Best Original Screenplay

A win for Pulp Fiction writers Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary (who were also up as a duo for Natural Born Killers in that same category).

-Best Costume Design

I’m sorry, but did you think the superhero movie with the most fancy spandex ever wouldn’t win? Silly you.

A win for Watchmen and head costume designer Marlene Stewart.

-Best Supporting Actor

This category had won a great deal of media speculation beforehand. Breaking the tradition of having an actor/actress of the opposite sex present the award for an acting category, Harrison Ford was selected to present this one. As Mark Hamill, his Star Wars co-star was up for the award, this was considered a strong indication that Hamill was going to win it. However, this ended up not being the case. Samuel L. Jackson won the award for his portrayal of Jules in Pulp Fiction (and endured the ensuing controversy when he used the “F-word” multiple times in his acceptance speech).

-Best Supporting Actress

Helen Mirren wins for The Madness of King George.

-Best Actor

Nigel Hawthorne wins for the title role in The Madness of King George.

-Best Actress

Jessica Lange wins for Blue Sky.

-Best Director

In a completely unsurprising occurrence, Quentin Tarantino, who had been nominated for both Pulp Fiction and Natural Born Killers, wins for the former.

-Best Picture

The big kahuna. Overture, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Forrest Gump, Pulp Fiction, and The Shawshank Redemption were all up. However, the early front runner, Forrest Gump, was suffering. The extremely negative “For Your Consideration” campaign between that film and Watchmen before the awards season had really hurt Forrest Gump, and it had been greatly weakened as a result. Many Academy voters who had been disappointed at the lack of a Watchmen nomination in this category thus voted for it in the lesser categories, and Watchmen practically swept the technical awards. And because of the bad blood, being for Watchmen meant being against Forrest Gump, which ended up not winning a single award.

Pulp Fiction, on the other hand, really was the natural pick. If James Cameron had enjoyed “The Summer of Watchmen”, well, it couldn’t hold up to “The Year of Tarantino”. The directors two successful films had made him very popular, and even then his style was being hailed as innovative.
And lo, producer Lawrence Bender won for Pulp Fiction.

---

[1] Based on a more minor documentary that came out in 1992, here it was expanded in scope.

[2]

...

Yeah, I skipped the Tarantino update, might come back to it later.

Thoughts?

[Brainbin]

Finally! The awards are being handed out! I think we've been waiting almost as long as one would during the actual awards ceremony

Originally Posted by vultan

“Thank you, thank you! Boy, what a crowd!”, Leno began as the applause died down. “Ladies and gentlemen of the Academy, all the billions of people watching this around the globe, welcome to the 67th Annual Oscars ceremony! Guess this isn’t the right venue for the Aristocrats joke, huh?”

And everything went downhill from there.

How frighteningly realistic Well, if any good can come from this, it's twofold:

1. Billy Crystal back next year (he came back IOTL)
2. Leno remains below Letterman; is forced out early, maybe in favour of the guy who comes on after him (sure, he's no good right now, but give him time, he'll improve); and if not him, then someone genuinely funny and talented

Originally Posted by vultan

That Wacky Redhead [2], a lighthearted look at the life of actress/producer Lucille Ball

Now who would want anything to do with something like that? But thanks for the hat-tip!

Originally Posted by vultan

When the ILM wizards had created Doctor Manhattan, they created the first completely computer generated main character in a motion picture, showing just what this new form of special effects could accomplish, and illuminating the shape of things to come.

Worth noting: the OTL film that is generally credited with accomplishing the same feat (The Phantom Menace) lost (to The Matrix); then again, everybody hates Jar-Jar. Maybe Gump losing in the obvious "gimme" category might jolt Zemeckis out of his obsession with CGI and encourage him to re-direct his energy into making good movies again? One can only hope...

Originally Posted by vultan

A win for Pulp Fiction writers Quentin Tarantino and Roger Avary (who were also up as a duo for Natural Born Killers in that same category).

One question: did Tarantino convince Avary to foresake a screenplay credit, as he did IOTL?

Fun fact: If you're wondering what's missing from later Tarantino movies that was in Pulp Fiction, the correct answer is Roger Avary.

Originally Posted by vultan

Samuel L. Jackson won the award for his portrayal of Jules in Pulp Fiction (and endured the ensuing controversy when he used the “F-word” multiple times in his acceptance speech).

Certainly the most iconic performance of those nominated IOTL. Whether or not Hamill has him beat ITTL is at your discretion, of course. Veteran actor Martin Landau won IOTL, for his portrayal of Bela Lugosi (a real person, which always helps) in Ed Wood. I admit that I expected the same ITTL, but I won't fault you for giving it to Jackson instead. Perhaps the race factor played a part in this more sensitive climate (no black actor won any award between Whoopi Goldberg in 1991 and Cuba Gooding, Jr. in 1997, IOTL).

Originally Posted by vultan

Helen Mirren wins for The Madness of King George.

Replacing Dianne Wiest for Bullets over Broadway, IOTL; odd because Woody Allen has a very good track record for directing actors in Oscar-winning performances. (IIRC, only William Wyler has him beat.) Not that I have any objection to Mirren winning, of course. Perhaps she'll win multiple times ITTL, in the vein of Maggie Smith.

Originally Posted by vultan

Nigel Hawthorne wins for the title role in The Madness of King George.

Sir Humphrey takes home the Oscar! How to explain that to Jim Hacker, then? (Tom Hanks, of course, won IOTL, for Forrest Gump. Given that he retains only one Oscar, his chances of winning for a later performance dramatically improve ITTL.)

Originally Posted by vultan

Jessica Lange wins for Blue Sky.

The only acting win as per OTL. (She won once before, for Tootsie.)

Originally Posted by vultan

In a completely unsurprising occurrence, Quentin Tarantino, who had been nominated for both Pulp Fiction and Natural Born Killers, wins for the former.

As Soderbergh would do in 2001, IOTL. (Like Soderbergh, he also wins for what consensus deems the better film.)

Originally Posted by vultan

And because of the bad blood, being for Watchmen meant being against Forrest Gump, which ended up not winning a single award.

This could be big. One of the biggest Oscar bait movies of the 1990s, and a smash hit to boot, losing?

Originally Posted by vultan

Pulp Fiction, on the other hand, really was the natural pick. If James Cameron had enjoyed “The Summer of Watchmen”, well, it couldn’t hold up to “The Year of Tarantino”. The directors two successful films had made him very popular, and even then his style was being hailed as innovative.
And lo, producer Lawrence Bender won for Pulp Fiction.

To be fair, Pulp Fiction was also highly critically-acclaimed, and finished in the Top 10 for the 1994 Box Office. On a more foreboding note, this is the first Miramax film to win Best Picture; it will almost certainly not be the last.

Originally Posted by vultan

Yeah, I skipped the Tarantino update, might come back to it later.

Looking forward to hearing more about Tarantino; his ego demands it!

[John Fredrick Parker]

Originally Posted by vultan

Pulp Fiction, on the other hand, really was the natural pick. If James Cameron had enjoyed “The Summer of Watchmen”, well, it couldn’t hold up to “The Year of Tarantino”. The directors two successful films had made him very popular, and even then his style was being hailed as innovative.
And lo, producer Lawrence Bender won for Pulp Fiction.

Called it.

[Electric Monk]

Very cool update, with no major surprises to me; Jay Leno is of course his terrible self. Have you mentioned The Simpsons yet? (Leno to Conan to Simpsons, in my head .)

And I will agree with Brainbin on Roger Avery, despite loving some later Tarantino films. I kinda hope Tarantino does some TV work like OTL, I rather liked his turn on Alias (a generally fun TV show for the first season especially—and the second season to a lesser extent—, although it really needed some guy in charge of the mythology) and I have to think that Tarantino's writing abilities, apart from speed of writing since he's certainly no Sorkin, are well suited to television.

[vultan]

Originally Posted by Brainbin

Finally! The awards are being handed out! I think we've been waiting almost as long as one would during the actual awards ceremony

How frighteningly realistic Well, if any good can come from this, it's twofold:

1. Billy Crystal back next year (he came back IOTL)
2. Leno remains below Letterman; is forced out early, maybe in favour of the guy who comes on after him (sure, he's no good right now, but give him time, he'll improve); and if not him, then someone genuinely funny and talented

All distinct possibilities. Honestly, this was the hardest part of the update to write.

Worth noting: the OTL film that is generally credited with accomplishing the same feat (The Phantom Menace) lost (to The Matrix); then again, everybody hates Jar-Jar. Maybe Gump losing in the obvious "gimme" category might jolt Zemeckis out of his obsession with CGI and encourage him to re-direct his energy into making good movies again? One can only hope...

Jar Jar had another thing going against him besides the fact that he was annoying: Stuart Little. Here, Doc represents the only movie with a major character who is computer generated.

One question: did Tarantino convince Avary to foresake a screenplay credit, as he did IOTL?

Fun fact: If you're wondering what's missing from later Tarantino movies that was in Pulp Fiction, the correct answer is Roger Avary.

Yeah, he did. Fortunately, the events of this timeline allow Avary to, immediately after this, get a chance to work with one of his biggest filmmaking heroes...

Certainly the most iconic performance of those nominated IOTL. Whether or not Hamill has him beat ITTL is at your discretion, of course. Veteran actor Martin Landau won IOTL, for his portrayal of Bela Lugosi (a real person, which always helps) in Ed Wood. I admit that I expected the same ITTL, but I won't fault you for giving it to Jackson instead. Perhaps the race factor played a part in this more sensitive climate (no black actor won any award between Whoopi Goldberg in 1991 and Cuba Gooding, Jr. in 1997, IOTL).

Meh, I'd chalk it up more to the halo effect Pulp Fiction receives from a better performance at the Oscars overall.

Replacing Dianne Wiest for Bullets over Broadway, IOTL; odd because Woody Allen has a very good track record for directing actors in Oscar-winning performances. (IIRC, only William Wyler has him beat.) Not that I have any objection to Mirren winning, of course. Perhaps she'll win multiple times ITTL, in the vein of Maggie Smith.

Allen had a great record, true, but Bullets suffered from a more crowded Oscars field (which, along with the snub Watchmen received, may be used as reasoning for going to the ten-Best Picture nominee deal for the 68th Academy Awards.

Sir Humphrey takes home the Oscar! How to explain that to Jim Hacker, then? (Tom Hanks, of course, won IOTL, for Forrest Gump. Given that he retains only one Oscar, his chances of winning for a later performance dramatically improve ITTL.)

Yes, Hanks will have a better shot later on. The question is, for what?

This could be big. One of the biggest Oscar bait movies of the 1990s, and a smash hit to boot, losing?

Remember when Avatar was going to win it all?

But seriously, the winds of change are upon the Oscars. This could be more of a boon toward smaller-scale movies than even for genre films. For instance, imagine if Ghost World won Best Picture, or American History X.

To be fair, Pulp Fiction was also highly critically-acclaimed, and finished in the Top 10 for the 1994 Box Office. On a more foreboding note, this is the first Miramax film to win Best Picture; it will almost certainly not be the last.

Or maybe Weinstein's Oscar appetite is sated.

Looking forward to hearing more about Tarantino; his ego demands it!

Yeah, I was trying to think of a creative way to do it in the vein of the Overture and Harry Knowles updates, but I couldn't think of one. I'll honestly just probably role it up into a final "1994 in film" update that will be super huge, include The Crow like one of my fans had been asking for, and allow me to burn the past before boldly moving on.

[Falkenburg]

I bet that Samuel L Jackson acceptance speech is still a cultural phenomenon years later thanks to YouTube.

Any chance of a more detailed look at Overture? That's the most intriguing film nominated.

Perhaps roles for Depardieu or Cassels?
Or would they go with the Hollywood tradition of casting English/British actors as the Black Hats?

EDIT: I will have to re-read the previous mention of Overture. Or maybe I just want more.

Falkenburg

[vultan]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

Called it.

WE HAVE A WINNER!

Originally Posted by Electric Monk

Very cool update, with no major surprises to me; Jay Leno is of course his terrible self. Have you mentioned The Simpsons yet? (Leno to Conan to Simpsons, in my head .)

And I will agree with Brainbin on Roger Avery, despite loving some later Tarantino films. I kinda hope Tarantino does some TV work like OTL, I rather liked his turn on Alias (a generally fun TV show for the first season especially—and the second season to a lesser extent—, although it really needed some guy in charge of the mythology) and I have to think that Tarantino's writing abilities, apart from speed of writing since he's certainly no Sorkin, are well suited to television.

No major changes to the Simpsons yet.

This is as good a time as any to say that while this is a pop culture-focused timeline, it's not a pop culture timeline, at least not to the degree that Brainbin's timeline is. What's the distinction? His POD is purely a pop culture change, whereas my POD is one in politics. My POD led to immediate radical changes in politics (which I think I did an adequate job in summarizing up to this point), which eventually filters down to popular culture, with the major changes hitting by 1994. So, prior to that, your episodes of Simpsons, Seinfeld, Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, etc might be slightly different, maybe Steven Seagal had a slightly different haircut in Under Siege in the 92/93 years, but I think it's reasonably accurate to assume the pop culture changes don't start really hitting until a bit after a political POD.

And I was actually thinking of some possible TV shows Tarantino could work on...

[vultan]

Originally Posted by Falkenburg

I bet that Samuel L Jackson acceptance speech is still a cultural phenomenon years later thanks to YouTube.

Any chance of a more detailed look at Overture? That's the most intriguing film nominated.

Perhaps roles for Depardieu or Cassels?
Or would they go with the Hollywood tradition of casting English/British actors as the Black Hats?

EDIT: I will have to re-read the previous mention of Overture. Or maybe I just want more.

Falkenburg

I touched upon it earlier, but I'll probably go over it again in the aforementioned "1994 in film" update I mentioned earlier.

[Plumber]

Hopefully Leno is defeated by Letterman.

Hopefully a more successful Tarantino works with Avary more, but his star has been foreshadowed to shine ever-brightly ITTL.

Humphrey! Well-deserved.

Forrest Gump's alternate reputation seems to be drastically different from OTL. Slumdog Millionaire wasn't seen as a poisoned chalice, but Gump is. This will probably mean more Oscars for Hanks, and hopefully some constructive thinking for Zemeckis, but this might push him further into his infatuation with special effects. I could see him working on a new superhero movie to out-Watchmen Watchmen. Perhaps something to do with The Avengers?

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

Originally Posted by Plumber

and hopefully some constructive thinking for Zemeckis, but this might push him further into his infatuation with special effects. I could see him working on a new superhero movie to out-Watchmen Watchmen. Perhaps something to do with The Avengers?

Maybe just the Cap, that would draw in the American ego.

[thekingsguard]

Awesome update for the Oscars! Glad to hear bits on Tarrantino and the Crow are upcoming!

[jerseyrules]

I've returned! And I love the political butterflies!
EDIT: you would officially be my hero if you cast Christopher Lee as Gandalf in LOTOR. It's about the only thing that could make this any better.

[Syriac]

Awesome thread. I have nothing constructive to say, just wanted to sing your praises.

[vultan]

Originally Posted by jerseyrules

I've returned! And I love the political butterflies!
EDIT: you would officially be my hero if you cast Christopher Lee as Gandalf in LOTOR. It's about the only thing that could make this any better.

Thanks! The political butterflies are obviously huge, since I technically used a political POD.

And we'll see about LOTR...

Originally Posted by Syriac

Awesome thread. I have nothing constructive to say, just wanted to sing your praises.

Thanks, and welcome aboard!