Serenity Opens Today

joemite writes "As every Browncoat knows, Serenity, the motion picture based on the Firefly series opened today. For the uninitiated, Serenity is based on the short-lived Fox television show Firefly (created by Joss Whedon, [Buffy the Vampire Slayer]), which follows a group of outlaws in a unique space-western universe. While there are no aliens or temporal anomalies, the stage is set for our group of heros to out-wit and out-strategize the giant and evil Alliance. Go out and watch the movie this weekend and see why the Firefly series is an Amazon.com best seller." If you're on the fence, reviews available at SFGate, Wired, the Seattle Times, and IGN.

Comments

I like the clean look

[Crixus]

I watched the Firefly pilot when it aired a few years back, and I'm sure I'm going to get some flack for this, but I prefer the clean, art-deco look of Star Trek.

I will go see it, however.

Re:I like the clean look

[FauxPasIII]

-nod- It's probably because I grew up on STNG, but I've always had trouble accepting the dystopic view of the future that a lot of sci-fi goes for. Most of the suffering that takes place on earth boils down to some combination of energy scarcity, resource scarcity and population density; once we have the resources and the energy to fling a life-supporting tub through space at speeds that make interplanetary travel practical, all those problems are relaxed a whole lot even given that you will still have petty warlords and barons exerting influence in their own little fiefdoms.

It's depressing (and I think/hope, implausible) to imagine a world with both warp drive and hunger.

Re:I like the clean look

[Mac Degger]

"Warp Drive, Hyperspace and Wormholes) all violate most Laws of Physics."

Actually, they don't. Wormholes however would take massive amounts of energy to hold open, and massive amounts of energy to enlarge from their planck lengths to a usable size.

Hyperspace is essentially travel through another set of dimensions than the 3 (+1 for time) we're used to. No violation of physics there, but we have no idea if there are more dimensions (although we do have good indicators). It's something we have very very little knowledge of; hyperspace is the farthest off of the three mentioned technologies, due to our massive lack of knowledge on the subject.

Warp drives are probably the least far off; they depend on warping space in front of you (compressing space-time) so that the journey through that space takes the same amount of time for the observer, but less for the rest of the universe...you travel the same distance, but because that 'distance' is smaller, when you get to your destination it turns out that you spent much less time traveling that distance. Or maybe you comprss space time to the rear, so that that space time ends up 'pushing' you forwards. Again, this is stuff we know little about (the actual geometry of space time, or rather how to influence it), mainly due to our lack of understanding of gravity (which somehow seems to tie in very much with rotation).

But anyway, neither of the technologies you mentioned violate known physics in any way. It's just that wormholes seem unpractical considering the energy requirements (although this might change when we get a better understanding of the structure of the universe), hyperspace is purely theoretical (idem ditto) and warp drive (ditto) which might be concievable when we detect our first gravitational wave.

Firefly

[LiquidCoooled]

I heard all along that it was another sci-fi show that was from the creator of Buffy.
I left it alone because "another hit show from the writer of XYZ" is usually a steaming pile of bumpoo. This kind of hype is like a one hit wonder from the music charts trying to get his 2nd song sold.

I don't care who wrote it, I wanna know how good it is.

I'm currently half way through the dvd episodes and I'm hooked.
Why the hell didn't anyone tell me it was this good on its own merits?

Hope the movie is as good.

ps, even after my rant, how exactly do you hype a series about a rag tag group of cowboys flying around in a spaceship getting into scrapes? I've never been able to describe it to my friends properly.

Re:Firefly

[jason ward]

Now I went into this more excited about this movie than any other movie I've ever been to. My expectations were to be given the stars on a platter. While the movie didn't quite live up to that, it was still a damn good movie. It defiantly ranks as one of my favorites.

The back story for several key mysteries in the series were explored and laid open, which was nice I guess. I have to say that the best thing for Firefly was to be canceled when it did. That's what drove the Fans, and myself, into a frenzy. The mystery of it all. So many unanswered questions to make me want to know more. It made me watch it again and again hoping I'd read between the lines a little deeper to understand the way of it all. The mystery made me love the show more any anything.

There were parts in the movie that really moved me. Parts where the audience cheered and others where the silence was so deadening it broke your heart twice over. I don't know if people not having seen the show will have the same response, but I think they will. The movie does a good job making you feel for the characters.

But that's enough of that. See the movie. It's worth it.

This year in the movies

[ZachPruckowski]

It seems to me that this year has been a re-defining year in the movies. I think that in 5 years, we'll be able to point to this year as the year things changed.

The reason I say this is that what this summer proved is that movies now need more than pretty scenery and special effects to turn a profit in the box office. "Batman" had a deep story, and "War of the Worlds" was a remake of a classic. "Wedding Crashers" was hilarious. The movies that stunk, like "Stealth" and "The Island", didn't have anything more than special effects and good looking girls.

But "Cry_Wolf", a movie without any special effects, made it's money back 5-fold. It is possible that the same sort of thing will happen with Serenity. So if it does well, that may get us not only sequels, but movies with more plot and story and atmosphere, which would be great for us, as more sophisticated movie watchers.

Re:Rotten Tomatoes

[Kazzahdrane]

I've been checking that page every few hours since yesterday morning. Nice to see the score slowly climbing up as the early bad reviews are shadowed by the many good ones :) As I'm in the UK I won't see the movie until it opens here in November so I'm hoping the Yanks give it a great first week a the box office and secure a future for Firefly.

"Serenity" Review from Salon.com

[SpryGuy]

Joss Whedon's feature-film debut, the science-fiction western "Serenity," is beautifully made, written with more wit and intelligence than we get from most contemporary movies of any genre, and features an ensemble of actors whose rhythms are almost supernaturally in tune. There's only one problem with "Serenity": It's not "Firefly," the TV show that first gave these characters, and this story, life in autumn 2002 on the Fox network.

Both "Firefly" (which is available on DVD) and this new movie incarnation of it detail the adventures and tribulations of a loner-rebel named Malcolm Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) and the ragtag crew of his space vessel, Serenity. Their story unfolds in a future world -- the 26th century, to be exact -- in which humans have left an uninhabitable earth to populate a new-old, way-out-there solar system. More Sam Peckinpah than "Star Trek," this isn't a shiny, sleek vision of the future: For one thing, the various planets in this new world have been recently divided by a brutal civil war, and the winning side -- the Alliance -- is now trying to gather all the outlying hoi polloi planets under its rule. Many of these planets are hardscrabble frontiers whose citizens still ride horses, use old-time firearms, and even, occasionally, wear sunbonnets. The idea isn't just that civilization as we know it has largely disappeared, but that people have been so buffeted by hardship that they've had to start practically from scratch.

The "Firefly" episodes burn slowly at first, but their emotional heat intensifies as you learn to live, and breathe, with the show's characters. That's an ancient narrative strategy, and one that Whedon had clearly mastered with his earlier series, the magnificent "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and its less resonant but still deeply enjoyable spinoff, "Angel." But apparently, this newfangled mode of storytelling intimidated Fox executives. They pulled the plug on "Firefly" after airing only 10 of the 14 episodes Whedon and his cast had completed -- and broadcasting them out of sequence. "Firefly" was seen by almost no one when it aired, partly because even those who desperately wanted to watch it -- namely, the many fans Whedon had earned with his previous series -- couldn't even find it when they turned on their TVs at the appointed time: The episodes were shown in fits and starts, several of them having been preempted by the World Series.

That's probably the worst thing you could do to a Whedon show, considering that he builds his narratives with the dramatic precision of 19th century novels. They don't always grab you with the first episode -- they're not made that way. Whedon prefers to reel us in gently, first setting the scene and then, week by week, drawing us into a web of complex character relationships that become a kind of home for us. Fans of Whedon's shows are the modern-day equivalents of those readers who so long ago got hooked on Dickens, people who would wait on American docks for the next installments of his newspaper serials to arrive on these Godforsaken shores. (Dickens biographer Edgar Johnson recounts how "waiting crowds at a New York pier shouted to an incoming vessel, 'Is Little Nell dead?'")

That's how it should have worked with "Firefly." The show finally did find its audience when it was released on DVD in late 2003, and Whedon, who had never given up on the show and its extraordinarily well-matched cast, sought ways to spin its posthumous success into another project. And almost against all odds, a major movie studio, Universal, put its money (perhaps not a whole lot, but enough) on a show that had earned lots of love but not a whole lot of cash.

"Serenity" -- which Whedon wrote as well as directed -- is both a primer on "Firefly" and an extension of it, a picture carefully calibrated to satisfy fans without leaving newcomers stranded. Whedon sets up the back story neatly at the beginning, introducing all of his characters in a few fleet scenes. Their dialogue comes off as casual, but it's really tightly scripted, a compr

An excellent film and an excellent show.

[readpunk]

I'll be brief about the movie, it's excellent and much more so if you have watched the show.

With that out of the way I figured I would comment on this constant Whedon people versus non-Whedon fans. If you don't like anything he has done and think he is a hack, fine. I don't really care. What troubles me is not people who dislike Whedon or don't think that this movie going experience can compare to a late 50's Goddard film. What troubles me is that it seems a lot of those who continually put down his work don't follow up with what they feel is superb in the realm of cinema or TV and when they do it is usually the most testosterone driven, mindless drivel. I know it's a crime to say this but Star Wars is terrible. I am not just talking about Episode 1: Jar Jar's hijinx, I am talking about all of them. I have begun to think that what really gets to people on sites like this and AICN is the gender role reversals that regularly pop up in Whedon's work as this type of hegelian master/slave status switching makes this movie (as well as the show) an impossible vehicle for all of our masturbatory jingoist fantasies.

So, if you dislike Whedon but actually a brain resting inside your cranium then I salute you with the whole of my heart.

On the other hand if you enjoy all the forms of art that encourage passive participation and little to no critical analysis or thinking then please go back to watching some tits bounce around your TV screen.

Saw it on Monday

[bobcat7677]

I caught a preview showing on monday here in Portland, OR. The crowd there very much enjoyed the show and there was a standing ovation at the end. While I did cheer with the rest of them and did enjoy the movie overall, I have to only give it 4 out of 5 stars. I won't spoil it for anyone and go into detail, but I was dissapointed with a couple things that seemed to detract from the flow of the movie so that's what knocked off a star. But there were plenty of good quotable lines, a decent plot, and quite a bit revealed about the FireFly universe that we didn't previously know about. I hope it does extreemly well in theatres and the actors come back and do another movie (the cast already signed a contract to do another movie if this one does well).

What's the deal?

[Apreche]

I feel like I'm the only geek in the world who doesn't like this show/movie. I watched numerous episodes including the entire pilot and was completely unimpressed. It looked to me just like every other average sci-fi show that the sci-fi channel produces. Granted, I was never a fan of this kind of sci-fi. I like Star Wars, but I hate Star Trek with a passion. Firefly/Serenty I don't really hate, there was just nothing great about it. It's "bleh" to me.

Am I alone here? I mean seriously, how much of the liking of this show is because of the show and how much is because of the hype and mystique surrounding it?

I guess it doesn't really matter. But it's frustrating for my friends and I because I can't understand at all why they think this thing is so great. And they can't understand at all why I don't think it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Re:What's the deal?

[theantipop]

I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

Unlike the above poster I only heard about the show from a couple of my friends. The were both discussing it pretty often after both bought the DVDs around the time they were released. I had never heard of it before and borrowed the set for a week. It surely didn't take much hype on their part for me to fall in love with the short-lived series. I'm not one to have a soft spot in my heart for scifi, even though I am a geek. I don't seek out sci fi like a lot of the more hardcore, but when things do find their way to me I am pretty discerning. Firefly succeded where others have failed because it was more than technological wet dream. It's got a very unique and well formed view of the future (which is what originally drew me to continue watching the series), the characters are very identifiable and empathetic, and the plotlines and story arc are, for the most part, very intriguing.

I often think that those who are unimpressed with the show felt so because it paints a very unglamorous pictures of the future. The way I see it, this could have been a documentary sent back in time. Everything is so believeable to me. I find that the Firefly/ Cowboy Bebop view of the future, one in which our toys have changed but that humanity hasn't, is as close to an accurate prediction of the future as I've seen.

Re:Group Gathereings: Vancouver BC

[wrecked]

Just saw it at the Paramount at 600 Burrard Street.

What is quite remarkable is that even though Serenity has been pre-screened what, 100 times? since May, you don't see cam torrents floating around. The restraint of the fan base from leaking spoilers and cams says a lot about their loyalty. Contrast that with say, the Hulk or Revenge of the Sith.

Here's hoping for the sequels.

Re:Browncoat

[ernunnos]

I think Whedon did that deliberately, wanting to leave some moral ambiguity there. He mentioned when the show first came on TV that he was patterning the crew of Serenity after the Confederates who lost the Civil War, and later became pioneers in the American west, trying to make new lives for themselves after their dreams of a separate, slave-holding nation were shattered. The Confederates were not completely innocent victims. It's never made clear in Firefly what exactly the Rebels were fighting for. It's probably not slavery, but it doesn't necessarily have to be completely righteous, either.

Unfortunately, Joss never went on to explore that possibility. The series went on to become standard white-hats-vs-black-hats. The crew never does anything or says anything to make viewers question their values, and we never really get to see the Alliance side of the story. It's too bad. That would have made an interesting and challenging TV show.

Re:Rotten Tomatoes

[Anthony Boyd]

Serenity looks like it should be called "The Adventures of Han Solo." Is this not just a Han Solo-like character in a Millennium Falcon-like ship doing what Han Solo did (smuggling), and avoiding the organized oppressive bad guys with bigger ships?

Hmm. Well, first, I'd pay good money to see a trilogy of movies about the early adventures of Han Solo, so although your comment sounds dismissive, to me it sounds quite enticing.

Having said that, if you mixed Han Solo up with some precogs from Minority Report, and added a bit of Johnny Mnemonic, you'd have a more accurate summary. But even that's not quite right. It needs a bit more to put it in a box. Maybe some Gattaca -- the idea of a perfect society, outsiders living free but in sometimes less than ideal conditions, hmm. Add in some of that "space western" from early, early Star Trek, and maybe that's it.

I don't know, I feel like I'm not putting it in a box very cleanly. Someone else could do it better, I'm sure. What I do know is that it's selling the movie short to just say "Han Solo."

Firefly and Serenity are like Traveller

[Orion Blastar]

I have played a Role Playing Game known as Traveller since 1984. We have been in situations like the crew of Serenity get into, only our plans work better, and we are not as gentle as their crew.

We considered ourselves to be gentlemen of opportunity, and wore many hats as the situation presented itself.

Sometimes we were heroes, pirates, smugglers, mercinaries, spies, bounty hunters, body guards, repo men, merchants, or any other vocation as long as someone was willing to pay, or we profited from it somehow.

Orion Blastar is the name of a Merchant turned Space Pirate that I played. He makes Malcom Reynolds look like little Suzy Sunshine. In one campaign we nuked two planets to make off with billions of credits from robbing banks after hitting the planets with nuclear missiles, and using normal missiles to blow open bank vaults. It was a 1970's/1960's technology planet for both planets, with an ultra-fascist government run by The Imperium, who are actually worse than The Alliance.

I run a MegaTraveller Yahoo Group where we discuss such things, and we have been waiting for the Firefly based movie to come out for a long time now.

Re:my favourite quote from the tv show

[fuzza]

Jayne: You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til you understand who's in ruttin' command here.

and

Mal: So did I call you back?
Wash: No, Mal, you didn't...
Zoe: I take full responsibility, sir.
Simon: Her decision probably saved your life.
Zoe: Won't happen again, sir.