Slashdot Mirror
The Browncoats Rise Again
The Original, One and Only, Hippy of Death writes "There's an interesting read posted on The Weekly Standard website talking about Joss Whedon and the unusual marketing campaign he is waging for the upcoming Serenity/Firefly movie." From the article: "It was ignored and abandoned, and the story should end there--but it doesn't. Because the people who made the show and the people who saw the show--which is, roughly, the same number of people--fell in love with it a little bit. Too much to let it go. . . . In Hollywood, people like that are called unrealistic, quixotic, obsessive. In my world, they're called Browncoats."
... and yeah, pretty much everything the article says is right. (How often does that happen?) The crowd was much less over the top than, say, the stereotypical Star Wars / Star Trek / LOTR opening night crowd; very few costumes. We were there to see the movie, and we did, and we walked out grinning from ear to ear. It's great stuff.
Oh, it's not perfect yet (lots of editing still to be done, I think) but it was still, in its unfinished form, the best movie I've seen in a long time. And the fact that Whedon et al. are actually paying attention to the fans -- treating us as part of the effort of making the movie instead of $TARGET_DEMOGRAPHIC -- is really damn cool.
It occurs to me that what's happening with Firefly/Serenity is very similar to what happened with Star Trek way back when. The fans basically kept alive what was originally considered a failed series for over ten years between the cancellation of the series and the greenlight for the first movie. We should count ourselves lucky that things moved faster this time around.
Anyway. This is some of the best storytelling you'll ever see on screen. Don't miss it.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
I really liked it until the last 3 or 4 minutes.
I hope that they change the ending before the final release.
Having the bad guy behave the way he did at the end cheapened the whole 'believe in something' theme that they were trying to push throughout the movie.
It was totally weak for the guy to change his entire world view based on one unsubstantiated news clip.
Other than that, I thought that movie kicked ass.
Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
I thought a long time about what I'd seen after a four hour drive home from a preview showing, and the main thought I came up with is this. We live in very uncertain times and the main attraction of Firefly that inspired its cult following was the comfort of a family that would weather all dangers. That comfort is gone in this movie. It is a GREAT movie, but it somewhat lacks the core quality that drew people to Firefly in the first place. SO, whether this is just a better than average movie release or the beginning of the pop cultural phenom the fans had hoped it would be remains to be seen.
Would that "1 B5 episode" be the entire first season?
If you've only seen one episode, see a couple more. Rent the series DVD, or if you're really tight, download a couple of episodes ("The Train Job" or "Our Mrs Reynolds" perhaps). If you're so convinced that it's not worth watching that you won't invest the time to see a couple more episodes and decide for yourself, then nothing anyone says here is likely to convince you. On the other hand if you're going to be open minded about it, an hour or two of your time watching what I think is some of the best tv sci-fi ever can't be that painful, even if you don't end up liking yourself.
Oh no... it's the future.
First of all, serenity doesn't care about technobabble, which was increasingly my pet peeve with 'trek.
"The engine is dead." "Well, go 'n fix it, damn it."
Second of all, the universe is incredibly well thought out. It's a universe that actually feels like It Hasn't Been Done Before which this day and age is rare.
Third... It's funny. damn funny. Characterization is awesome, and the use of humor is on the highest level of Whedonness. I remember having diet coke come up my nose when in episode "Jaynestown" the locals on one planet started their tribute to Jayne. (This makes more sense if you see the whole episode - Jayne's not really one you'd expect to have a tribute written for.)
I could go on, but I'm a horrible rambler, so that's it for now.
The episode you saw (also titled Serenity, IIRC) was neither the worst nor the best of the series, but it happened to be one that required having watched a good deal of the series to really get into that particular storyline. This is a problem with a lot of Whedon's work, actually -- not a problem for serious fans, of course, but it does sometimes put off the more casual viewer. OTOH, the long, intricate story arcs in all of his series are one of the reasons the guy has so many dedicated fans, so it cuts both ways. He's telling stories, not episodes; if a story takes one episode to tell, that's great, but he'll also tell it in ten episodes if needed.
;)
If you're willing to give Firefly another shot, I'd recommend finding someone who has the DVD boxed set, and watching the series premiere (the real premiere, the two-hour one, not the fairly mediocre episode that Fox actually showed first) and then, if you like it, watching the rest of the episodes in sequence.
What's so great about it? Well, for me, it's pretty much the same stuff I think is so great about all of Whedon's work to date: terrific dialogue, immensely likable characters, intricate storytelling, and a willingness both to use cliches as needed and then discard them the instant they're no longer useful. Buffy, Angel, and Firefly all managed to surprise me, repeatedly, just when I thought I was being led down a familiar path. Hardly any TV shows ever do that, and few enough movies.
It's the characters who make it work, ultimately. You may not always agree with them, or admire them, or even understand them, but you like them, and you care what happens to them. They're not archetypes; they are, even when they're fighting vampires or flying spaceships, people you feel like you could sit down and have a beer with. This is Whedon's great talent, and it's what keeps his fans coming back to his work.
Not sure if this answer is un-cult-like enough for you, but it's what I've got.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Once upon a time, there was a TV show that was very popular with the geek crowd. It was cancelled two seasons in, then resurrected for one final season (in the worst time slot possible). The fans refused to keep quiet, so four years later the studio created a really bland animated version of the show. That didn't shut them up either; fans still demanded more. Ten years after the show went off the air, a theatrical movie was released. Even though it was a special effects showcase loosely held together with an unlikely plot and really wooden acting, it was financially successful enough that Paramount studios finally gave in and decided that they'd let the fans shower them with money for the next twenty-five years.
I think it's great that Joss found a way to bring back Firefly, but I wonder if the press is taking this serisously is because they've burnt themselves out from thirty-five years of mocking the people who kept Star Trek alive (after a fashion).
"I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
I had never seen the Firefly series and a friend told me about the Serenity screening (http://www.cantstopthesignal.com/). I went to it not expecting much and not knowing anything of the story. It turns out you don't need to know anything about the series to enjoy this movie. The screening was a great story it was already a well done movie. I enjoyed the movie so much I bought the series on DVD the next day.
When Serenity comes out do yourself a favor and watch this movie. I share many similar interests with other people here on Slashdot and I feel that many of the nerds here will like it.
"Tempt not a desperate man" - Willy S.
From the article, this sounds like the first time they've "risen". If this was the second Firefly movie, then that would be "again".
However, I have to admit the "Brownshirts rise again" has a better ring to it than "Movie studios realize that nerds are a profitable target demographic."
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
Fox delibrately purchases sci-fi series so it can shoot them in the foot. Which it did to Firefly. It was delibrately destroyed, played in the wrong order, preempted by random shit, not promoted at all.
It's not the least bit surprising you hadn't heard of it.
It had the potential to be the next Buffy, minus the weird image problem Buffy has to this day. Get rid of the silly name, get rid of the silly premise, get rid of the much mocked manner of speakage, keep the important concepts. Instead of the 'best show you're not watching', maybe people would watch it. (And there were a lot of Buffy fans to pull in. Except, of course, Fox never purchased any ads during Buffy or Angel to actually locate them. Not that ads would do any good when you move the damn show around.)
Or it could have been the next Star Trek, written by someone who actually understands characters and plot. (The next next Star Trek, I guess, as B5 would be the next one.)
Or, hell, fans would have settled for a cult classic.
Instead the show got cancelled before all the episodes ever aired. It is possibly unique in TV history for being canceled before the pilot aired, because they showed the episodes out of order.
The only reason anyone heard of it is that fans pestered the studio for months. Not to renew the series, which is hopeless, but to release the DVDs....which they then proceeded to purchase like madmen. They didn't manage to break any records I'm aware of, but they did manage to convince the studio the movie would sell.
And people like it for different reasons, so it's nearly impossible to explain.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
I haven't seen the rough cut myself, but several friends have, and they're all wildly enthusiastic about it. As in, enthusiastic enough to see it again, for money, when it comes out in a few months.
...and that is the fact that, even if the movie bombs [as the article points out, but even moreso if the movie does well], it will send FOX the message that there's nothing [fiscally] wrong with totally buggering up the handling of a series.
-- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
Oh by the way, don't mod me insightful.
It was fun to watch everyone in our theater checking their cell phones prior to the movie starting. We're in one of the most densely populated areas on the east coast, but apparantly "Service not available" was all anyone got. Folks all around us kept commenting on it as they switched their phones off.
Yes, that's right - at the fan preview, somehow they managed to stop the signal.
Peace,
-McD
"Given the pace of technology, I propose we leave math to the machines and go play outside." -- Calvin
OK, I disdain Fox as much as the next sci fi fan, and they've honked me off too. But this makes no sense: Why would they spend the money just to ditch a show? Is Rupert Murdoch on some sort of anti-SF crusdae?
Firefly got canceled because they expected it to do, proportionally, what Buffy did for the WB -- but since Fox was already established and a much bigger network, that was impossible.
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Why stay on the outside? Borrow or rent a few DVDs and watch a few episodes of any of his shows. On TV, you'll find reruns of Buffy on FX, Angel on TNT, and in July, Firefly on SciFi. Overall, Whedon fans trend slightly more female than male. I managed to get tickets to the most recent "Serenity" screening, and the crowd looked to be about 50-50 men and women. And slightly older than I was expecting - I think the 30-somethings were most strongly represented. The "deeper thread" that draws in fans is primarily the characters themselves, their individual arcs and their relationships. The creative supernatural or scifi worlds he's created are certainly a great part of the fun of being a Whedon fan, but the resonance of the shows comes from the dynamic of the created families for each series.
"It's a western set in space, a conceit I know some people didn't care for"
Personally, it's not the conceit I don't care for. I just don't care for westerns. I like SciFi, and watched a bunch of Firefly, but concluded it's not, as billed by some, a Sci-Fi Western. It's a Western. The props are Sci-fi, but the premises, stories and charachters are all western.
I've no problem with other people liking it. I just don't think you should expect others to if you are basing that expectation on whether they like Trek or Babylon 5. It would be more relevant to ask if they liked Bonanza or The Magnificent Seven.
Good point. There's no point marketing to the fanboys who'll go and see it a dozen times anyway, you need to market it to people who've never heard of it.
I've NEVER heard of Firefly/Serenity outside of Slashdot. The marketing/publicity is non-existant.
Whether it's any good or not it's hard to tell, I'll have to wait for a review from a non-fanboy. I'd get it off bittorrent but my 30,200bps modem won't take it, but I suppose that's what I deserve for living in the arsehole of the universe.
It starts with Mal clutching a piece of machinery, then falling to the deck where his blood drips through the grate. Followed by a flashback to when he buys Serenity (the ship) and enlists the crew (not the passengers, whose enlistment is depicted in "Serenity" the pilot).
"Out of Gas" is the best episode in the series, but only if you've watched all the ones leading up to it and so have an attachment to all the characters already. It is the worst episode to watch first.
100 posts and a +5 mod for the parent, yet I'm the first one to point this out. Does that seem right to you?
This should be on the movie poster... Almost feels like a quote from a Kevin Smith movie.
I am billdar, and I approve this message.
but seriously the adaptations made in the 80's have an almost porno-grade cheesiness to them
What? Because some guy's disembodied head is licking a naked woman all over her body and in some places twice?
You're absolutely right of course. The adaptations of Lovecraft (at least the few I've seen, maybe only that one now that I think of it) have always completely missed the point.
A good Lovecraft adaptation would rely totally on atmosphere and characters' reactions to drive the horror and the special effects and blood-and-guts-and-gore-and-vein-in-my-teeth stuff would be kept to a minimum, if shown at all. The true masters of horror, like Hitchcock, knew that real fear lies in the unknown, ill-defined terrors, creating an appropriate mood and not being sure what's going to happen. So many modern horror movies are solely exercises in repeated startling (not scaring, big difference), buckets of fake blood and poorly delivered anatomy lessons.
Although, from what I've heard ("The Sixth Sense", "The Ring", and that Shamalama-ding-dong guy etc) real horror movies are making a bit of a comeback. Too bad I'm so spoiled by MST3K that I end up watching a lot of old 50's B-movies instead. In fact, I discovered one, I think it was called "The Unknown World" that was essentially the same plot as "The Core" only slightly more unrealistics and nowhere near as poorly-written. It amazed me that so many 9-figure special-effects extraordinaires of today are no better the cheapest, cheesiest, shoe-string-budget movies of 50 years ago. Money can buy lots of eye-candy, but apparently it can't buy good writing (and often not even good acting), because so few of the most expensive movies ever have it.
You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
I'm sure you're trying to be fair in your analysis, Mr. Lucas. But are you sure some of this just isn't sour grapes? I mean, you lost a lot of nerd cred, making Greedo shoot first like that.
Yeah, it must be hard watching some vampire-happy upstart steal some of your thunder like that. We understand.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
What have Confederates got to do with it? The sci-fi part is pretty much an excuse for having characters on the losing side of a civil war *without* them being Confederates. Look at the politics they talk about: it is _nothing like_ the same as the cause of the American Civil war.