Slashdot Mirror
Firefly: A Special Feature
Philip B. Gaines writes "Philip B. Gaines announces the completion of an independent multimedia commentary project, "Firefly: A Special Feature", a DVD based on the FOX television series created by Joss Whedon. A free examination copy of the project is available for those willing to provide feedback about this media experiment. "Firefly: A Special Feature" is a 3.5 hour multi-module review of Whedon's innovative space western series. The interactive review features a variety of interpretive and analytical components--all intended to further discussion of this seriously underappreciated show. The bottom line of the project is dialogue, not promotion. If you have seen "Firefly" before and found it intriguing--or even if you haven't--this project will make you think, argue, and perhaps even learn a bit. For "Firefly: A Special Feature", I have acted as writer, video/sound editor, and media producer, working with complete independence from the producers of the show or anyone else whose influence might bias the analysis. Plans are underway to do this kind of project again, so I would appreciate feedback on all levels. See the website for a formal description of the project Email pbgaines@pbgaines.com for a copy of the DVD."
I mean, I'm glad that this isn't a DVD with fan fiction style sex scenes and unplausible dialogue, but fan documentary? Is that any better?
--- http://foo.ca
"Advertising pretending to be news... again..."
If it's interesting to people, so what?
"Derp de derp."
...Science Fiction shows ever put on television (imho). At first, I didn't think I could get use to the "space cowboy" feel, but this show was absolutely fantastic. It was a much more realistic look at what a potential "space wandering" humanity could become (when comparing to something like Star Trek). The cast and acting was great, the episodes, plots, and storyline, all very intriguing. It still completely shocks me that Fox took it off the air. Several friends of mine and myself still wallow in frustration as to why it ever got taken off the air.
I highly recommend picking the series up on DVD, available at Amazon Dec.9.
java guy, tech blog...
I thought MWC lasted 12 years. Either way, it is an eon in TV years. Few shows last more than one season, far fewer last five years, and fewer still last twelve years, it is a a statistical outlier at that point. By many accounts MWC simply got old.
An "analysis" written by fans - or even worse, a fan - is generally guaranteed to be uncritical garbage. As far as I'm concerned if you're going to produce/consume masturbation material about a show/series, stick to fanfics stay away from slashdot. This seems like a good place to start for Philip and Hemos .
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
it was decent scifi and so a lot of slashdot readers were instant fans, myself included. the universe was not the sanitary one of star trek nor the mystical one of starwars. it was a universe where technology hadn't been humanities savior, and there was enough of it to see that it probably never would. the universe had limited resources: fuel, food, etc. the universe required the characters to be people who did what it took to survive. this allowed for them to be interesting characters without requiring they be jedi or android. the firefly's crew was made up of prositutes, priests, and even the captain killed at least one "bad guy" in cold blood. i didn't watch every episode, but the few i caught i really enjoyed.
I liked the show , and thought that the dialogue alone was head and shoulders above ANY show (not just scifi or western) previously or currently broadcast, but that isn't relevant.
Isn't the topic here the interactive multimedia approach to the show's episodes ? No one has commented on that yet.
"Nothing is impossible for the man who refuses to listen to reason"
I found that the biggest appeal of Firefly wasn't the plots, but how the characters building. To me it seemed as if they first tried to make it obvious who each character was, but then kept showing that each person was really much more complicated and then the interactions between them as well, and then it kept getting more complicated.
"Advertising is per se not interesting. If it were interesting it WOULD be news and thus no advertising would be necessary. The two are mutually exclusive."
Forgive me if in my sleep depraved state I misunderstand your point, but an advertisement can be interesting without it being mutually exclusive.
"Derp de derp."
1. Unlike Star Trek, Farscape, and Battlestar Galactica, there was no sound in outer space.
There are more differences, but I only need one to show that you didn't think very hard, so I'll stop there.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
It is too bad about "Firefly" not receiving the support it needed from Fox, because I've noticed something about ALL of Whedon's series. The first season is just the setup.
If there had only been one season of "Buffy," no one would remember it now. The first season has some good lines and is solidly done, but what made the show special was how Whedon developed the characters and situations he'd established in that first year.
"Angel" was much the same. The first season set the ground rules, and then he started to screw with them.
I enjoyed the episodes we saw of "Firefly," but what I really miss is seeing how it would get fiddled with, as the series progressed.
Make a man a fire, and he's warm for a day. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Oooh, no sound in outer space! Good one, Golias! I guess we can ignore those more trivial things like plots and acting. I bow to your clear ability to "think hard" about stuff.
Wow, don't you sound smart. Aren't you hot shit?
Seriously, give it a rest. Your virtual dick swinging is really annoying to everyone over the age of 14.
If you'd seen Firefly, you would know that it had a great deal to it that really wasn't like other sci-fi shows. They used handguns because they were more simple, and reliable, and pretty darn effective. There was actual political strife, and people needed to "have a job" to survive, as opposed to being a bunch of peaches-and-cream good-guys cruising around the galaxy.
And there were moral dilemmas - ones that the main characters often resolved in a less-than-satisfactory manner.
I'm not saying you had to "like it", but denying that it's different is pretty frigging impossible to defend. "It sucked" is way easier. And maybe it's true. It's hard to tell just based on half a season aired out of order.
See, now, I could go on, but I've already contributed *so much* more than you to this conversation, and I don't expect you to come up with anything worthwhile in response to my efforts. So why should I waste any more time typing to a worthless little shit like yourself?
What makes Firefly worth watching is that it's a well written, well acted, and well-directed show, featuring production values that were about as good as you are likely to see on TV, and story arcs which were entertaining to follow.
That said, there were differences. Firefly paid much closer attention to physics than any TV sci-fi I've ever seen, and had a very rich back-story that easilly stands up against B5 or Farscape. It was certainly an order of magnitude better than either of the last two Star Trek series to emerge from Paramount. When the DVD set comes out next month, borrow it from a friend or something and see for yourself.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Sci-fi is relegated to too much of a niche compared to other forms of entertainment. Movies can afford fantasy and sci-fi special effects but even there most "sci-fi" is a glorified action or war movie which people can relate to.
People want to relate to what they are watching. A sci-fi movie or TV show can do well if you manage to explain the technology and the world without bogging down the plot and by creating a plot and characters people can get into.
Firefly was too good. It created a whole new world, but it tried to make it familiar by throwing in a very very clever wild west element. It was so subtle it didn't seem camp, just a light seasoning that made me believe "hey, its possible!"
The problem was it was centuries in the future, there is no America, no Russia, no islamic fundamentalists, and no cute teens agonizing over frivolous issues. Not enough people in the US like sci fi enough to make it successful beyond UPN or the sci-fi channel. It's a demand thing, and it sucks.
And to be honest, its not because people are frivolous or stupid or just want the same old thing. It's quite simply because perfectly nice and reasonable people just don't relate to sci-fi.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Jesus Christ on crutches, let me clue you in : HOMER did it all first in the fucking Odyssey. What is this nerd hangup over so-called originality? If that is your metric then Star Trek (three words: Hornblower in space) and, yes, especially that horridly acted, insipidly plotted, wannabe Wagontrain piece of third rate bantha shit Battlestar Galactica were the worst about lifting homeric themes directly. Farscape was a sight better, but really: The Fugitive... in space... with more guns and boobies!
I liked Firefly not because it was original - I consider it Mark Miller's Traveller on TV - but because it was ballsy. For everyone who ever wanted Picard to just beam some annoying Ferengi twit into the nearest star, Firefly payed off in the first ep. But if you want something fairly original and different (for TV, scifi literature has treaded this ground repeatedly) how 'bout: no aliens?
Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
Babylon 5 was the first TV show to make extensive, regular use of CGI. It was mostly geeks in garages/basements fooling around with Lightwave, too. ;)
;) DS9 also tried to start copying B5's "epic continuous story arc" format in the later seasons. (Backoff, I said "tried to")
In addition to all the space sequences, a great number of interior sets were also virtual, such as docking bays, the observation dome, and the main station length "outdoors" expanse. (Let's not talk about the transport shuttle tracks)
Around this time, Star Trek was saying they'd never use CGI and would stick with their models. Now look at Voyager and Enterprise...
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
Its a shame you couldn't get past your prejudices concerning the accents. The dialogue was actually subtle and poetic, but did take a little patience to get used to. It reminded me of the first time I read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress". Heinlein's invented dialect was an annoying distraction at first, until I let it fade into the background and it began to work its magic. If you're not taking this as an insult, you should try a few of the later episodes. There's some really cool stuff in this show. Its worth the effort.
I thought the show was slow until I watched about 4 or 5 episodes. My husband was really into it, so I was "forced" into watching it.
What I really liked about the show (once I understood the characters and their motivations) was the rhythm that developed between the plot, dialogue and action. I had to become invested in the story in order to appreciate the speed of delivery.