Slashdot Mirror
Firefly DVD Set Released
Richard M. Nixon writes "As previously reported the DVD set for Joss Whedon's ill fated Western/Space Opera is now available. The DVD has all 11 episodes that aired, 3 episodes that didn't air, commentary on 7 episodes, and lots of bonus features including Joss singing the Firefly theme. It would make a nice Christmas gift for any Whedon fan who has not already run out and bought it. If DVD Sales are good enough, could we see a second season?"
Bought it for my daughter for Christmas a week ago. Looking foreward to seeing the three un-aired episodes.
And to think they took this off and left "Everyone Loves Raymond" on. Now they're wondering why we don't watch TV...
RB
"Anyway, my original point; bringing back a series after it's been cancelled is unnatural"
It worked for Star Trek.
and politically incorrect. Go ahead and mod this post as flamebait, because here's a short excerpt from an opinion piece about why Firefly was really cancelled. Link appears after the excerpt:
w .fireflyfans.net/feature.asp?f=39
______________________________________
"Firefly's greatest transgressions against the modern American Statist Quo, however, were in my estimation twofold and related...this was not the mindlessly smarmy "optimistic" vision of the future that is Star Trek...Firefly, in its way, was, in this post 9-11 climate, almost downright seditious. The Alliance enforcers--the "bad guys"--were called "Feds." The attempt to unite and homogenize people was seen, by Firefly, as not a "good" thing...nor do most people agree with Captain Reynolds' words, "The government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned."...Do not think that Firefly was not drawing allusions and parallels to our own society and its attendant beliefs, or that this implicit criticism went unnoticed by the powers-that-be...But most of all, living "beyond the law" as Reynolds and his crew had to, the moral universe of Firefly depended not on the "rule of law," but on its much-maligned and deliberately-misunderstood alternative, the rule of honor...And Firefly made the case...for the ultimate superiority of the rule of honor over the rule of law--at least...For you see, the rule of honor demands what law must defer: individual responsibility, personal culpability, what is fair and what is just, of every man (and woman) who lives by it.
_________________________________
http://ww
I loved them all. I am not as much of a Buffy the Vampire Slayer fan, or of Angel for that matter. Firefly, on the other hand, resonated with me for some reason, and I'll try to put them into words.
The reason I liked the series is because it shows that there is nothing new under the sun. People in the future will remain people, with all their faults and flaws. Long after we're gone people will still be killing each other, stealing from each other, trying to rule, trying to escape, trying to make a living. I believe Firefly went far beyond many science fiction stories in portraying this. Far too many sci-fi shows are utopian in nature, and with the notable exception of Babylon 5, nearly all of them fall into this trap. Slavery existed before, and still exists today. It is unlikely that this particular scourge will be eliminated totally in the future and may make a return. Likewise, the related concept of indentured servitude is one which make make a comback, for better or worse. People tend to dwell on the evil of slavery while forgetting that indenturing allowed the Americas to be colonized. And, as happened before the line between them became blurred, and this was portrayed (a little) in the show. The whole concept of migration, colonization, rebellion, and pacification were used as setting. For a television show, this is unusally broad.
Firefly showed the good with the bad, in that of the individual as well as the whole of humanity. The characters, of course, are no exception. They each have positive and negative traits, show weakness at times as well as strength. Furthermore, they showed different kinds of weaknesses and strenghts, where most science fiction and fantasy tend to ascribe one key skill and fatal flaw per character. Spock had a heroically big brain or Heracles had heroically big muscles. Characters on Firefly were not necessarily good at things one would expect. Sure, they had their skills, but there were nuances, suprises even. How many times on Star Trek did Wesley solve a science problem or Worf handled a matter of honor. (As an aside let me say to Wil if he reads my post I hold him blameless. He didn't write the character) One thing that Whedon is good at doing is taking television characters in unexpected directions. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, bet at least he is unafraid to change his characters through the story.
The technology in Firefly is another aspect which contrasts it from other science fiction stories. Some stories are all about the technology, often Star Trek fell into this, and others the technology is not the story at all. My example there would be Star Wars which is more fantasy than sci-fi. Firefly walked a different path, showing different levels of technology used by different people. On Star Trek the Feds have one level of technology and science, some worlds are more primitive, and some mysterious races possess more. Firefly wasn't afraid to show that people would natually have more or less. More or less money and resources, and theremore more or less fancy tech. There are haves and have-nots, and sometimes the most sophisticated technology is not the most reliable.
Lastly, I would like to say a science fiction show absent of aliens is a treat. Turning humans into monsters shows unusual insight into the human condition. That humans could become aliens has been explored, but its nice to see a television show reach new, or rarely trod ground.
All of this adds up to a uniquely entertaining show. I rarely make time for television, but I found myself eagerly waiting for Firefly to come on. I wish the Sci-Fi Channel would pick it up, but alas, it is now the Stargate Channel.
The parent complained that "Everybody Loves Raymond" is belittling to men, and it gets marked Flamebait? How? Why?
Raymond (and "According to Jim", and "My Wife and Kids", and "8 Simple Rules" while Jon Ritter was still alive, and just about every other "family" show on these days) gets most of its laughs from the foibles and follies of a mostly inept father/husband. If the character of Raymond were a woman, NOW and other womens' groups would be screaming bloody murder, and rightly so. But since the dufuses of these shows are all men, we're expected to laugh along with everyone else.
Again, I ask, Why? Why should men be made the butt of every joke on TV? Why should husbands and fathers be portrayed as lazy, stupid, untrustworthy fools? What ever happened to "Leave it to Beaver" and "Father Knows Best"? The only halfway decent father figure on TV these days is Red from "The 70's Show", and he's an ass most of the time.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.