Slashdot Mirror
Whedon Calls Death Knell For Firefly
Ant writes "Entertainment Weekly is reporting on the end of Firefly." From the article: "Alas, Whedon's fond memories are also tainted by Serenity's status as a franchise nonstarter; despite Universal's best marketing efforts, the film only mustered $25 million. 'In the end, it was what it was: a tough sell,' says Whedon, adding that it appears the Firefly saga has reached its conclusion. He has no regrets -- and he's moving on."
Or a question really, then a thought.
:(
Why go straight to a movie? Why not back to television. With a movie you only have one chance at redemption. With a series you have several. Make a few more episodes, get picked up by the SciFi channel and let it ride. I loved the Firefly series, but I didn't care for the movie. Yeah, it had great parts (so do some ugly hookers), but overall it both sucked and blowed!!
I guess I will be looking for that made for TV movie of Angel. And don't tell me it will never happen, because I already know.
I guess that stuff like this is the reason they make scotch.
I mean, announce the death the day the DVD comes out? DVD sales of the show was what picked it back up in the first place...
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
...I already have the "Firefly" DVD and I will be buying the "Serenity" DVD today after work.
Hmmmm. You don't think they timed this, do you?
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
... what Joss Whedon was really expecting from Serenity. I personally don't think he actually expected it to resurect the Firefly series, rather, I believe he looked at that as a edge case and merely wanted the film to serve as the end of the series.
Dammit! I was hoping Firefly would be the perfect test-case for the iTunes episode-selling model. I think its perfect for situations like this - if the fans really want it, they can vote directly with their dollars, and the hell with the myopic networks. Alas, a little too late it would seem.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
sad :(, serenity was great, as was firefly.
But, Serenity was not all it could, or should have been.
The series had a lot of potential, and in trying to please too many folks, the movie lacked the ability to measure up to it.
I saw it once, and would rather watch the episodes of the TV show...
-merlyn
I agree it's atough sell. But why didn't he wait until after the holidays. My hope was the DVD sets would help get some extra revenue. In retrospect I should have bought one!
Oh come on, he happens to make this statement on the very day the DVD is set to be released? Sounds like a marketing gimmick to me... If the DVD sales are amazing - and they might be, considering the cult status of the show - he can then announce a miraculous comeback.
Personally, I liked the show, I really liked the movie, and I can see why both failed in the financial sense (bad marketing for both, episodes out of order and plot development much too slow in the show).
Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
I'd be picking it up today even if it wasn't my first VFX film job.... I just watched the last of the Firefly TV series last night, having not discovered it until work on the film wrapped up, and I'm pissed I won't see more of these characters.
Say it ain't so, Joss. Say it ain't so.
I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
:(
That is all.
"People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
It was poorly planned. They tried to keep too many secrets from the audience, which just wound up making the show hard to get attached to. Compare it to lost: lost only gives you a few mysteries at a time, and always wraps up a few before delivering the next batch. Firefly really needed better writers and better planning.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
"It was a leaf on the wind." *CRUNCH*
Somewhere, where fictional characters continue to live on after their creator has let them go, Malcolm Reynolds is punching someone in the face.
I came here for a good argument
but i've learned in life to never say never.
too many times, things change again.
i remember after the 1st "star trek" movie - they were saying then
that "this is the end, there will not be any more trek." HAH!
Just wait.
As more people are exposed to Serenity and Firefly, the interest in another movie will surface again.
Any AC's got the text for us?
"This wound is beyond my ability to heal. We need Elvis medicine!"
"...despite Universal's best marketing efforts..."
Sorry to say they must not have marketed hard enough. I watch more than my share of TV and don't recognize the movie title.
If indeed that is the best they can do; me thinks they should get a new ad agency...
Firefly is one of the most original and true series I have seen in a long time. I have been a fan of the TV series ever since it aired (or close to) and saw the movie in the first day, which was also exceptional. Having humor, action, drama and horrir mixed together in a palattable form is a nice change to degraded shows like "Nip Tuck" which are about immorality and things that are fucked up. Do people not take to anything somewhat wholesome anymore?
Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.
I could tell they spent a ton of money marketing Serenity, I saw commerical after commerical for it. Unfortunately it was the same bland and cliche commercial I see for all movies. I can't really say how it could have been done but they needed to pass the tone this movie was something different from a movie like "Stealth" in the advertising.
How many more commericals must I watch that has the word "Adventure" in it!? "Adventure has a new name", "the Adventure continues". These ad companies get tons of money for that?!
When Buffy the Vampire Slayer creator Joss Whedon looks back on 2005, he can take comfort in knowing that his film-directing debut, the sci-fi Western Serenity, resurrected his canceled-too-soon cult classic TV series Firefly, and was also one of the year's best-reviewed movies. ''I should say I'm above reading reviews,'' he says. ''But I would be lying.'' Alas, Whedon's fond memories are also tainted by Serenity's status as a franchise nonstarter; despite Universal's best marketing efforts, the film only mustered $25 million. ''In the end, it was what it was: a tough sell,'' says Whedon, adding that it appears the Firefly saga has reached its conclusion. He has no regrets -- and he's moving on. He's currently penning a Wonder Woman flick for Warner Bros., and has the thriller Goners set up at Universal; he'll direct whichever gets a green light first. Buffy's papa has more Slayerstuff in the pipeline as well: an ongoing comic book (''the eighth season we never made''), and possibly a series of DVD flicks focusing on characters like platinum bloodsucker Spike. As for Serenity, ''I have closure,'' he says. ''And now, I can have it in my home -- which means that finally I can actually stop working on it.''
Fanboy. C'mon, there are all kinds of equally, or more entertaining shows. It was that good of a show, yet all the computer nerds, and sci-fi geeks hopped on board because it was there wonderful "Joss Whedon". Hell, he did Angel and Buffy, I can obviously think of a couple better programs than those!! Stop acting like a fanboy. . . There are plenty of other things to do.
YOU'RE WINNER !
Another lame blog
With the DVD coming out today, and the DVD sales of the original series having been what made the movie possible in the first place, isn't this a bit premature?
I for one plan on buying the movie this evening. And know lots of people who are anxious to see it since having been talked into watching the boxed set. Personally I think the movie was very poorly marketed. It focused way to much on the scifi angle and the action and nowhere near enough on the character dialogue and interaction which has been the biggest selling point for all of my friends and family. They all told me that from the commercials it just appeared to be another dumb scifi movie with nothing of interest for them.
Here's to hoping the DVD sales will renew interest.
... when Wash did.
I watched the movie without previously knowing there was a series as well. My impression was: nice effects, good plot, the director should be shot as he can't tell a story and ruined it all.
Sci-Fi is about breaking the constraints and tired plots of conventional stories. This means fantastic things like aliens, robots, artificial intelligence and time travel. Not rehashing the stale concept that the rest of the universe really isn't so different from home and we'll never really evolve past the emotions and biases we've got right now.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Firefly - Direct To DVD.
I'd buy it.
Coderz 4 Life
Too bad.
Firefly was a great show.
Serenity was imho somehow lesser in spirit to the series, but wasn't a bad movie at all.
Unfortunatly, it didn't even show in most theaters down here in Belgium, so most people
don't even know about the movie or the series.
The setting was among the most original sci-fi I've ever seen..
:)
That is all.
A lot of articles have been written on this matter. In many of them, Whedon claims to be holding out to see how DVD sales do before making any final decisions. I'm willing to entertain the hope that he might just be waiting to see if this is one of those movies that don't get discovered until the DVD is released.
IIRC, the movie wasn't a complete failure. It just wasn't a smash success either. It's didn't quite break even at the box office, but the DVD sales should put them into the profit zone. As Joss puts it, "it's a tough sell."
Personally, if Firefly/Serenity dies, I will be sorely disappointed. It ranks very high in my list of favorite Sci-Fi series.
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
This is the end of Firefly because Josh has too much ego to work on a lower budget.
Call it artistic integrity if you want, but I call it being pouty. There are plenty of people who love Firefly and wouldn't care what channel it's on, but cable and the Sci-Fi channel is just beneath Josh Whedon.
IIRC, the first Austin Powers movie wasn't too big of a success, but because of the big following it picked up due to video rentals & sales, the second one was huge. Seems like Whedon is throwing out his eggs before they've hatched. Of course, as others have suggested, this could be some sort of scare tactic to get more people to go out and scoop up the DVD's...
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
I guess you can stop the signal :(.
Loved the show, loved the movie. The lady and I still fall asleep to the TV show episodes on a regular basis (bedtime viewing).
If Whedon isn't interested in retrying the show in an iTunes/download model, it is because he doesn't have faith in his own creation and he doesn't have the balls to take a risky venture. This guy is Hollywood now, and there's no turning back.
Great news, geeks: we can do it ourselves. How? Fanvids. Right now they're not the greatest quality, but just wait for what the next generation can do. Screw copyright (I'm against it). Whedon calls it dead, so to me that is public domain. Take it, write better episodes. Find another Firefly ship with another crew and go deeper into the universe of Browncoats and the Alliance.
I'll pay for a few episodes. Go get 'em, kids.
The show flopped. It was cancelled. If someone can't be bothered to watch a show when it's on his TV in his lown iving room, why in the world would he be bothered to leave his house, get in his car, drive several miles to a theater, wait in line for tickets, watch the movie, and then drive back home?!
I'm not saying the show was bad or that the movie was bad. I've seen either. But a flop via broadcast will almost certainly lead to a flop in the theater. Why anyone would think otherwise is beyond me.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=171728&thresho ld=1&commentsort=0&tid=129&tid=133&mode=thread&cid =14300353
Personally I think it serves him right for trying to hijack the Futurama thread.
Fox had the rights to the TV show and would not allow it to be made. Universal optioned the rights to a movie but couldn't use the name Firefly which is why they used the name "Serenity".
It would've been wonderful for more episodes of the show but the moguls wouldn't have it.
Ah well, it was a great show and it was fun while it lasted. I've got no regrets for supporting the show as much as I had.
You can't take the sky from me.
Stuff that matters
You can't take the sky from me.
Everyone sing along!
Theme song
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
C'mon, there are all kinds of equally, or more entertaining shows.
Huh? What the hell are you on?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think of Firefly as the TV version of Christ's second coming, but what exists on TV that's worth watching? And what shows exist in sufficient quantity to warrant the "all kinds of" label?
Whenever I flip through the major network stations, all I see is new reality shows and faceless "family dramas". Surely you're not suggesting anyone watch that crap?
Only new show this season I watched completely was HBO's Rome, and it wasn't so much because it is a great show, I'm just a fan of all things Roman. When new episodes pop up in on demand I'll watch Mythbusters as well. Other than that.. TV is absolute crap.
Even Joss' comments must be taken with a grain of salt. I sincerly doubt that this will be the end of Firefly - considering that currenty, Amazon.com ranks Serenity as the #1 selling DVD, with the complete Firefly series coming in at #6 (again). DVD sales on this franchise are through the roof, and have been the fulcrum upon which the future of the franchise balances.
Call me what you will, but I don't think we've heard the last of this yet.
But of course, I could be wrong...
Poor means hoping the toothache goes away.
Firefly was so good my wife would watch it with me; an absolute first! :)
It had it's problems, just as any other show, but it was different and interesting.
Yes, there are plenty of other things to do. But then I don't watch much television. In fact I watch nothing with any regularity these days. My viewing is really limited to my DVD collection for the last year with the exception of Cattlecar Galactica. (My apologies to any Uber fans of Battlestar Gallactica. It's just that I keep seeing Lorne Greene, and if you know who he was you know why I have that alternate name in my head.
By the way, I never saw Buffy or Angel: I'm not a Joss Whedon fanboy. I like Firefly.
We have always been at war with Eurasia!
Gee, it was really worth signing up wasn't it? (I'm not saying that against you, it's against them...) How stingy are they? More of the article available before the break than after... Pretend there's a whole slew of other wonderful information after the break to only get one more paragraph is a bit rich.
...that the movie only made $25m, and that marketing is being blamed. I saw the movie almost as soon as it came out because I had seen the trailer and was hooked - I had never heard of 'Firefly' until I read about the movie (I don't watch much TV). I really thought it was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time, even though I still haven't seen an episode of 'Firefly' and I'm ambivalent about 'Buffy' at best, so you can't call me a Whedonite. Shows what I know.
NeverEndingBillboard.com
NeverEndingBillboard.com
It's not going to be Firefly but eventually we're going to see something that does fit into the niche that I see so many Firefly fans (I refuse to call you people "Browncoats") wishing their show could get into. That would be the "paid for by the fans" niche which I think we're heading for with some property eventually. Look at the fan made stuff being done for Star Trek New Voyages right now and think about how cheaply that's being made. Then look at the estimates for what it was going to cost those poor misguided bastards who wanted to finance another season of Enterprise. Somewhere in between those two numbers (much closer to the New Voyages price I'm sure) is going to be the spot where fans pay for their show.
Production values won't be what you'd like them to be but they'll be damned close. Actors will get (low paying) work on these shows and some of them will go on to bigger and better things. It will be like a step below working in soaps or something.
Firefly won't be the show that does this because it's owned by Fox and so you can't keep it alive without paying them. This business model doesn't allow for that or, at the very least it doesn't allow for it on the scale that Fox is expecting bank. It'll be more like Open Source Television.
Fans of Science Fiction should just get together and cut the studios out. It needs to be an original story. Nothing studio owned will work. The guys getting traffic doing Star Trek episodes for free are the place to start. If people can get together and make fan based shows like New Voyages then they can use that as a stepping stone to an original story Sci-Fi pay per episode series.
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
See my comment below regarding Josh's poutiness. Why would you make such a comment to be published on the release date of your DVD? It's called passive-aggressiveness. As in, "You didn't behave the way I wanted, so no more Firefly for you!"
This article has been linked to a lot over the past few days on various Firefly/Serenity boards. The quotes from Joss have clearly been taken out of context, a quick read-through of the other interviews he's given over the past few days show this. He's found closure because he got to tell the story he wanted to tell from the beginning. But he's said that if he had the chance to tell another story in the 'verse he turn right around and do it. Specifically, he's hinted that another movie would reveal that bounty hunter Jubal Early from the last episode of Firefly is very much alive. I'm a Browncoat but I don't stick my fingers in my ears and go "lalala I can't hear you" when people suggest the franchise has come to an end. But this article is simply trolling. FYI, Joss has confirmed that he's going to write another series of Serenity comics, and has been saying for months that the DVD sales of Serenity will determine whether the franchise will be seen on screens (big or small) in the future. EW are just quoting Joss out of context to stir up some contraversy. I for one am very unimpressed.
I hope that 'Universal's best marketing efforts' were better in other countries, here in New Zealand I saw not one mention of Serenity in any advertising media at all.
If I had not watched the series on DVD and followed the talk about the movie on the web, I would probably not have known it was even being produced.
Sadly on its opening night in my region there were only 12 other people in the theatre... at least it was quiet.
If I had a DeLorean... I would probably only drive it from time to time.
I was just wondering yesterday when we'd start hearing rumors of the next movie and if they'd do anything to replace either of the missing characters. Well crap. Could have waited till after Christmas. Now I think I will go hang myself and Joss will be the reason.
URK! *dangle* *dangle*
This is a fairly misleading headline/summary/article stub. In (numerous) interviews over the past week or so, Joss says in most of them that any future Firefly/Serenity-age would depend on the DVD sales being particularly big.
"It would depend on huge numbers from the DVD," writer/director Whedon allows. "Obviously, we are still shy of making our money back from the box office. But we are within shouting distance. Still, it would have to blow up pretty huge for a sequel to be called for.
"Mind you, stranger things have happened. And they do seem to happen to me. So it's not like I'm shutting the door." -- Toronto Star interview
"The, um, the movie is finished. And the story is told. The world is not finished. There's more to tell, but that's always the case with everything I do and whether I get the chance to tell [it] or not it is up to somebody else. So I made sure that this movie had completion and didn't feel like a glorified prequel. It's its own piece and it wraps everything up. I have a sense of closure that I never had, and I can walk away satisfied. But if somebody tells me not to walk away, I'll turn right back around." -- Comcast Movies interview
This EW article seems to take the stance that since Whedon is working on projects other than Firefly/Serenity and is taking a realistic view towards their finances, he clearly has abandoned them, despite the fact that his other projects have been in the pipe for some time.
"Serenity's status as a franchise nonstarter; despite Universal's best marketing efforts, the film only mustered $25 million"
It's hardly a surprise it didn't make many ticket sales. I saw this film recently and found it painful. Acting ability was virtually non-existent. The plot was pretty poor too. As B-Movies go, it was far too long. Was the TV series just as bad?
I dunno. All I remember is a poster. And I wasn;t all that impressed with it. Maybe it would have been a good idea to mention it was a sci-fi movie or something.
We won't make it and we can't take the chance that someone else will make it, it will be a success and we will be shown to have made yet another bad decision.
If we don't want it no-one can have it.
Lessee.
On Fox. House. Bones. Both on Tuesday nights.
On the WB. Supernatural. Smallville (which has finally gotten good again after last seasons jumping over the shark and into a pile of crap).
On NBC. Four Kings (coming soon). My Name Is Earl.
There's lots of good TV, you just have to be willing to give it a chance.
Please, no more 'clean clothes' series!
Thanks in advance.
- blah blah
The day the DVD comes out is the day they stop waiting for more box office returns, and DVD sales don't count to the penny counters looking for it to become a box office franchise series.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
Actually, it's more like "We won't make it, and we won't allow anyone else to make it, because it's ours. We don't care that it might make or lose money for someone else. It's our football, and nobody else gets to play with it."
This is the standard attitude among publishers of pretty much anything.
ahh... curse his sudden but inevitable betrayal.
Since OSC endorsed this movie and he is clearly an asshat, it was his fault that it didn't do so well.
:-)
Let's be honest: The overly loud and violent movie was a massive letdown after the subtle and very human original series. The new TV ads touting the DVD as an "action" movie over clips of explosions and River's absurd tough-girl routine just add insult to injury.
:)
Whedon steered Firefly into a ditch when he compromised its integrity in order to make Serenity.
Mod me down if you can't take the truth.
The most rabid believers in American Exceptionalism are the exact same people whose policies are destroying it.
Sadly, it had a LOT of competition for screen time. It was only in theaters for a few weeks, which didn't give it much time for repeat viewers to build up sales. I remember wanting to go see it for a 4th time, and it wasn't playing anywhere, AND it wasn't in the cheap theaters yet either, that was weird.
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
I loved the series and liked the movie, but if he comes up with anything else like that, he should sell it to SciFi channel, where it might have had a chance. Unfortunately, he's right that it is just too late now. The series needed a flashier start to get a bigger audience where it was, and he planned for a longer run to do the character development that never got a chance. Sad, but that's life on network TV...
Fox is the poster child for why the movie studios have problems. They had an executive who "didn't get it" with Family Guy ruin the original series by actively sabotaging its timing slots. Then it sells over a million DVD sets after Cartoon Network picks it up and does reruns. With Firefly, they put the damn series out of order and wonder why it failed miserably. A little hard to follow a linear story line without a linear scheduling... assholes.
Some people think that a la carte cable is bad for consumers, but I'd gladly pay $30 for Sci-Fi, Cartoon Network, Comedy Central, the History Channel and MusicChoice. That'd be only $20 less than full digital cable, and if they'd throw in a "Sci-Fi 2, 3, 4" like they have with MTV, I'd glady go up to $40. The TV and movie studios are phenominally stupid, such as the case of Firefly where they spent obscene amounts of money producing it only to let some executive rip the sequence to shreds for shits and giggles.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
I never really got into Buffy though I often saw it and enjoyed it, especially the "Grrr...argh" zombie at the end of every episode. Same with Angel, though I thought that was a much better show but only caught a few episodes. I heard Firefly was a good show and thought "what the hell" and bought the DVD, loved it. Until I watched it I didn't even know who Joss Whedon was, or that the show was made by the guy who made Buffy and Angel. "all" the computer nerds and sci-fi geeks (I'm one myself, what of it?) didn't jump on because of Joss, so stop throwing around accusations like we only love it because of its creator because that's gorram bullshit.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=serenity.h tm
Looks more like $38 million to me, which is roughly the production cost, and most definitely not a failure.
It is disappointing that they didn't reach $80 million, as then there'd be 2 more movies made, but this isn't grounds to give up on the series.
Give me a break! If Universal had given Serenity the marketing it deserved, Joss wouldn't have to resort to cheesily timed "announcements" like this one, they would all be too busy counting their money.
include $sig;
1;
Fox owns the TV rights and they are NOT letting go of them for 10 years as per contract.
Cable and broadcast TV are right out...
Movie was the next good idea...
IF dvd sales are up "maybe" they could try direct to DVD...but that would be the last big hope
(I'm sorry but iTunes vids arenot quite up to finacial snuff to provide 1 million sales per episode)
Why would anyone who's not a fanboy be in here posting, anyway? Only to be an asshole who likes to stand around criticizing others to no purpose. Those of us who DO like Firefly don't like losing our friend, and yeah, maybe someone somewhere is looking for a "Save Firefly" movement like Farscape had, but to just go post because you have an unsolicited opinion is simply a foolish waste. An enlightened person does not engage in idle talk or pointless criticism.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
The series was great, the movie was terrible.
Why did River have to become Buffy? Whedon's a hack, that's why.
Dumb-dumb-dumb.
Blasphemy. This is one of the best television seasons for quality shows that I can remember!
Two words: Battlestar Galactica.
It is (coming from a rapid Firefly fanboy) so much better on every level except comedic. Not even going out on a limb I will say that it's the best science fiction show that I have ever seen on TV. That includes all flavors of Star Trek, Babylon 5, Space: Above and Beyond, Clone Wars, Farscape, and a bunch of other shows whose quality is less than or equal to Earth2 that I won't mention. I'll actually go out on a slight limb and declare that it's best science fiction that I've ever seen in any moving picture form. Anyway, rent or buy the first season and be blown away.
Other than that: Veronica Mars. My Name is Earl (almost as funny as...). Arrested Development. Rome. Supernatural is fun. The Amazing Race is always good for a laugh. Family Guy.
C'mon. You can practically throw random darts at the tv schedule and find a great show.
Four Kings (coming soon).
Nice try oh precognitient one, what other shows that haven't come out yet are great?
Babylon 6? Star Trek:We didn't let Berman anywhere near this one?
I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
"despite Universal's best marketing efforts, the film only mustered $25 million."
I call bullshit on this one. Most people I know never heard of the movie. When I went to the theater, there was no movie poster nor a listing on the Marque. The screen number that it was showing in, rather than having a lit sign over the number, had a hand written tag taped to the light, and this is no "small" theater. This was the largest in the area.
I'm not even going to defend the movie, because it had it's critics, but it's certainly far better in many ways to other very popular films this year, and it had a psychotic fanbase. The fact that I know several Firefly fans that didn't even KNOW the movie had already come and gone before they found out about the DVD just further goes toward making me think their "best marketing efforts" were utter rubbish.
If I were the the paranoid type I'd say Hollywood intentionally made it a point to show fans with this movie that yelling loudly about the things you want to see will get you what you want. They tell YOU what you're going to watch, not the other way around. It's the only way they can use the media to brainwash the masses. It just doesn't work as well when we actually get some say so in the matter.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Sci Fi is not owned by Fox, it is owned by NBC.
$#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
Am I the only one thinking this guy should be modded "Funny" ?
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
My 2 year old LOVES that theme song. Maybe because he has Cerebal Palsy, and one of the few words in his vocabulary so far is "Me". We sing together every Friday when it comes on Sci-Fi channel; he shouts "ME" in time with the song.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I honestly can't remember the last time a Universal film did well. Even King Kong (which I saw today and is overlong and indulgent) is taking in below expectation. Warner and Disney and Fox all have their successes, but Universal and Paramount have both been struggling recently.
Serenity got near to no publicity here. I go to the cinema most weeks through the Summer and only knew thw film was coming out because I read Slashdot and PA. Universal really didn't do their job here.
When people can spend all their time watching the garbage the typical TV channel shows, and yet this pinnicle of excellence in modern Sci-Fi cinema can't even overtake the freaking DOOM movie in sales, that's a pretty shocking indication of how very crappy our culture in the US has become. It makes you realize what a miricle it was that this movie ever got made in the first place. Spoonfeeding stupidity to the unwashed masses is much more profitible than making good movies that people don't watch.
--The universe will not be altered by forum threads, even those which are very wry. --Tycho Brahe (Penny Arcade)
If Firefly doesn't stop now, then how else are we going to have Firefly: The Next Generation here in twenty years, complete with the new River/Jane-daughter wise-cracking empath, a male companion, a cyborg mechanic, and the psychotic-chained-up Reaver named "Thudd" for comedic relief?
Then, there was the rehashes: Dukes of Hazzard, King Kong, Fun with Dick & Jane.
My opinion was Firefly was damn familiar!
The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
Why do people keep talking about making the money back. There are plenty of films that don't make money yet end up with sequels. And there have been several where the sequel made more than the original film.
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
Hey, I'm just going by what I've seen in the previews for it, heh. IMO, almost anything with Seth Green is golden.
Battlestar Galactica
As much as I liked the original- you'd better be talking about the "reimagined" version.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Having said the movie sucked and getting modded down as a troll in an earlier /. thread, I feel vindicated that the level of suck is official. Cancelled TV show and high production costs were cited as a major problem. Box office revenues were $25M yet the cost to produce the movie was $38M(advertising not included). Both the TV series and movie were financial disasters. I want to know how a studio was sold on producing this movie. That salesman is worth his weight in gold.
Getting it's stories straight from D1gg now?
Battlestar Galactica is really good. I realize that the name summons images of the campy 70s version, but the 2000 edition is something else entirely. It's very different from Firefly, but in terms of quality, it's probably even better. The premise (entire civilization destroyed, tiny remnant of humanity clinging to life) is very interesting, and they seem to be doing it real justice.
:)
Stargate Atlantis isn't bad. It has some good plots. The 'wise native woman' schtick by the actress playing Tayla grates on me, and I don't really like the new guy they just added... but on the whole, they're doing some interesting stuff. Regular Stargate used to be great, but jumped the shark about the time that first latex-clad babe showed up. (season 5, maybe?) Now they've gone off into Yet Another Epic Conflict With Yet Another Unbeatable Bad Guy. With their old plotline mostly resolved, I wish they'd gone back to simple exploration or something, or maybe cancelled it. I still sort of watch the show, but I fast forward through most of it. It's really a shame.
Galatica, though... that's just in a whole different class. Best SF show in years. It feels more like watching a very, very long movie than a TV series.
Mildly interesting trivia note: in the current half-season cliffhanger, the captain of the other Battlestar played the female leader of the resistance movement on Mars in Babylon 5. Took me awhile to remember where I'd seen her, so if anyone else was wondering, that's who it is.
Before seeing it, I was hoping Serenity would have done better so wed get sequels or maybe even have Firefly come back to TV (although I never really beleived the latter would ever happen)
That said, after seeing Serenity, I felt it is a great ending to Firefly.
The big dark secret of the Alliance was revealed (although im sure there are others, and this finally explains the reevers), they're no longer going after Simon and River. We find out a bunch of stuff about River. River finally has a real place in the crew (as the new pilot) and it seems she is less insane now that the truth about the reevers was revealed
While I'd love to find out more about Book, it seems pretty clear he was like the assassin in the movie before he became a shephard, i still feel Serenity was a good ending and it left me satisfied.
The only part im sad about is it seems Joss had plans for 2 more and if thats true then there must have been more plot to explore but now we'll never know
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Austin Powers made almost $54 million at the US box office from a $16.5 million budget. Not quite a blockbuster, but definitely a box office success. Of course, the sequels made a lot more money.
Huh? What the hell are you on? I think it's time I introduced you to a sci-fi classic known as "Homeboys in Outer Space".
There goes the signal...
I think that goes without saying by now. The new version has deffinately come into it's own. I cant wait till the seccond half of the seccond season!
Web Developers: Celebrate to our roots! Animated Gifs and Tiled Backgrounds, dont let our history die!
/Pedant Off
From the moment he decided that what Buffy needed most was one of the characters as a corpse that wasn't walking about wise cracking and sucking blood, just sitting there in an all too human way dead from a thoroughly mundane illness, it seems that he has had this self destructive desire to fling away every chance he has to entertain.
The world doesn't need more angst and misery, it needs more laughter. Your mother dying of cancer may be poignant, but one thing it sure isn't - entertainment.
Personally, I feel that the whole firefly community killed the Serenity movie as an act of mercy - rather than whipping their friends and family up into a "you gotta see this" frenzy, they were debating whether to even watch it themselves as soon as the news broke that Joss was going for the cheap emotional hit. Killing book was almost acceptable, in a pathetic whedon kinda way, but killing Wash - especially in such a trite fashion?
It just shows that Joss, unfortunately, doesn't have the skill required to entertain any more... from that point of view, I'd say that Fox actually protected us from Whedon. When you see what happened to X-Files, and the death throes of Stargate SG-1 circling the drain - that's a fate that won't befall Firefly!
NO!!!!!!! Gorram networks. At least we have plenty of American Idol, Survivor, Anna Nicole Smith, Paris Hilton, and other such utter craptastic DRECK. Sigh....
couldn't use the name Firefly which is why they used the name "Serenity".
If you listen carefully, you'll notice that the word 'Firefly' isn't said at all in the film.
How many times did you see the actors on morning talk shows? Zero.
How many ads did you see on TV? Not many.
They hardly marketed Serenity at all, preferring to let word of mouth be the only driver. I dont think that was a good idea, word of mouth is important but you need good marketing early to jump-start the whole process.
I think DVD sales will do well though.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You know, I'm kind of a jackass and all, but I'm being dead serious when I say that that is adorable.
I'm a huge fan of Firefly, and I loved Serenity.
I, in fact, loved Serenity so much that I'm okay with it being the end of the series. For me it was the emotional climax the series had been lacking, and while I would LOVE to see more from the 'verse, Serenity was enough of a finale for me to walk away satisfied.
Maybe it's just my nature, but I'm okay with stories having an end.
TRHOnline - Staggering Towards Brilliance
Now he can finally work on that other Buffy spinoff... Faith the Vampire Slayer! In this show, Eliza Dushku reprises her role as Faith. The series revolves around her looking sexy as hell. Er, that's it. No story. Really, that's all I want.
Yes, which is titled: Battlestar Galactica.
With all respect to Whedon, the Serenity WAS a made for TV movie. There were scene transitions that practically shouted INSERT COMMERCIAL HERE. He's a great story producer, but he's still rough around the edges where cinema is concerned.
If only something could have been worked out, the money that went into Serenity could have funded a 2 - 3 episode miniseries, maybe more. More screen time for everyone, more time to lay out a bettr plot, more time to build word of mouth among the fanb... cognoscenti. If only Fox had brains.
If only pigs had wings...
Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
I read on several Firefly related boards that this is not true. They said the story was pulled from Whedonesque and FireflyFans.net...
So my question is, has someone been able to corroborate this story, has Whedon mentioned this to any one of the Serenity/Firefly?Whedon sites?
Don't believe everything you read...
This is hardly an announcement. All he said was that he wouldn't let it get him down. He's got other things to do now, and he can't do anything with the FF verse till the DVD sales provide enough momentum for a sequel of some sort - or they don't. Either way, the only thing to do is move on for now.
He has already stated that there WILL BE comics extending the story. To call the Serenity verse dead because Joss is moving on as far as movie projects go is just plain idiocy. That's EW for you though.
I think the biggest reason why Joss Whedon is letting go of the Firefly franchise is what I said in the subject line above.
Whedon--well aware of the mediocre responses to the Elektra, Catwoman and Aeon Flux movies--wants to make sure that the script for the Wonder Woman movie (which he'll also direct, I believe) is of high quality and be done well in general. After all, Whedon has been well-lauded for his work on Buffy: The Vampire Slayer, a good example of a properly-written and produced strong female protagonist character.
yes, you are alone in thinking that.
:-). Yeah, but hey, that name still conjours up flying motorcycles for me, and that was the one series that wasn't named Battlestar.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
She was also on Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Fuck yes.
That and They couldn't tolerate someone making Them look stupid for cancelling it. :)
...Never mind.
I wonder If they'd let him at least write some more stories, release a book.
Then someone could make an animated series...
[shudders as he remembers the Star Trek animated series]
Nothing to say here... move along
The DVD set of the TV show has sold well. Perhaps the DVD of the movie, which went ofn Sale today, will also SELL WELL. I have my copy coming to me as a Christmas gift (if it doesn't come I will buy it next week). Go buy your copy as well:)
The comments attached to the linked blog post also offer some good insights and thoughts.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's a big reason why piracy concerns me. It hits the genre shows and movies hardest because they have somewhat higher production costs for a smaller fan base. Shows like Lost and Survivor are cheap to produce as are talking heads shows, sitcoms and such. Yet the irony is they appeal to a more general audience and have higher numbers. Direct marketing to the fans won't help because the production costs are still the same. Simply producing the show for X dollars isn't the issue it's can you make a profit doing it? The networks are going to stick to profitable shows so genre is always going to be challenged when it comes to competing in the free market. Computer effects have improved things but as capibilities have gone up so have expectations. Remember the original Star Trek was considered an effects show yet it had hardly any effects and some episodes had virtually none except for stock space shots. Serenity's biggest problem was it cost too much for the fan base. If they had produced it for 15 mill it would have been profitable and they'd be talking sequels. Without DVD sales Serenity didn't even come close to breaking even. Remember the studio only gets around half the box office money. Expectations have to come down or revenues have to go up for smaller market shows like Firefly/Serenity. There simply aren't any other options.
http://serenityfails.ytmnd.com/
He robbed from the rich, and gave to the poor
:) )
Stood up to the man, and gave him what for
Our love for him now ain't hard to explain
The hero of Canton, the man they call Jayne!
(sorry - you sing your song, I'll sing mine
I spent the evening flickering into your darkness.
Yes, fanvids. How brilliant. Have you ever sat through a student film? Do you think it will magically get better because someone makes a student film based on Firefly? Student films don't suck exclusively because production costs are high, it's because -- guess what -- it takes TALENT to tell a story, and not everyone has talent.
And do you really think Nathan Fillion and the other cast members would jump onboard if you asked them, "Will you be in my Firefly episode! Never mind that we'll all be sued out of existence!" (And rightfully so, why should you get to profit from someone else's art?)
Of course, writing is effortless, anyone can do it. How silly of me.
No offense, but you obviously don't know a lot about film production, so why are you trying to teach others how to do it?
"But the cars are all flashing me, bright lights are passing me, I feel life passing me by" - Stiff Little Fingers
If Fox doesn't want anything more to do with it, why don't they just give them up? Let someone else take a chance if they dare?
There ought to be a law.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I'm one of those people who has a low tolerance for hype. A very low tolerance - and as much as I loved the TV series, I got sick to death of teaser trailer after teaser trailer and all the yakkity-shmakkity-blah-blah-blah about pre-screening after pre-screening. Months and months of "ZOMFG TEH MOVIES GONNA PWN!!!!" from everyone and their monkey and I stopped wanting to hear about it, started getting sick of it, and wanted nothing to do with it by the time it was actually released, as I was relieved everyone had finally shut the fuck up about it. For me, it was overhyped by April - I wanted the goods and didn't take kindly to being strung along. I don't go to strip joints for the same reason.
But seriously, how many people saw Firefly at a pre-screening and then actually watched it during the release run? What do those figures look like compared against ticket sales?
ahmen brother........i am a lover of sci fi, hell i love chessey sci fi....but firefly /serenity blew chunks. It seemed that joss smoked a bag of crack,watched cowboy bebop, and then decided to make an inferior copy
House? Bones? Supernatural? Smallville? My Name Is Earl?
Dear god, you have the shittiest taste in entertainment. I haven't watched prime-time network TV in years. The last series that I ever followed was Seinfeld. And even that was mostly crap.
My Name is Earl, and Las Vegas, IMO have been the only shows worth watching on the big 5 networks, and not even Las Vegas earlier in the season. Seriously... Ugh!
As Tolkein once noted in his essay "On Fairy Stories", if you have to suspend disbelief, the author failed. The true test of a good story, Tolkein argued, is that you shouldn't have to suspend anything. It should feel real to you, at least to the point where things "just make sense". Lengthy technobabble and explanations shouldn't be necessary.
Again, though, most of this is equally true, no matter what the setting. When the setting is exceptionally difficult, expensive or unusual, therefore, the setting has to be relevent. Asimov's Foundation series could not work in a Wild West setting. The original Star Wars trilogy uses space to express enormity - something no other setting could provide - so whilst the story is a fairly trivial quest in and of itself, it couldn't carry the range of expression in any other setting. The Matrix is also a fairly trivial quest, but requires the deformable, maliable nature of virtual reality in order to cover the metaphysics of the story. It simply couldn't work anywhere else.
Serenity, on the other hand, had nothing new in it and required nothing from the setting. The story looked like a simple mesh of a cowboys-and-indians western with Matrix-style combat, Libertarian vs. The Evil Commies politics, and stole the "alien enemy" from an Asimov short story.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
The commander of the other Battlestar, the Pegasus, is Admiral Cain, who is played by Michelle Forbes. She's done a bunch of other TV roles; you can look them up in IMDB if you're interested. The one I remember her most for <showing_my_age>is the Bajoran Ensign Ro Laren in Star Trek: The Next Generation.</showing_my_age> I don't think she played "Number One" in B5--I remember that woman as being blonde.
Of course, in the original BSG, Admiral Cain was played by Lloyd Bridges.
The movie was a waste of money that should have gone to a superior franchise
*looks at Parent's post*
*looks at parent's Username*
*looks at Parent's post*
*looks at parent's Username*
*laughs until he has a stroke*
Mildly interesting trivia note: in the current half-season cliffhanger, the captain of the other Battlestar played the female leader of the resistance movement on Mars in Babylon 5.
What your source? Number One; Admiral Cain.
It's average rating is about the same of King Kong's. 80% on Rotten Tomatoes is impressive. Nonetheless, I saw the movie not seeing the series, and I liked it a lot.
Silly me, I figured we were all done jerking off over this already.
I gotta tell you, I'm having trouble getting it up. Serenity is a brutish looking bitch, and I'm just not that desperate.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Two words: Battlestar Galactica.
Of course, Serenity was *in* BG.
see: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=15563
-=Maggie Leber=-
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4966&cid=11336 63
Serenity had all the makings of success. It was promoted, it looked good, it had all the loyal Firefly fans behind it, it got glowing reviews from the critics. What does it *take* to get people to go see a movie these days?
Well. . . Putting it in theaters would help. I never went to see Serenity because it never opened at the local Texan Theater here in my town, which is the only screen within about 40 miles of my home.
He could always make a new show with similar charactes and a similar setting, or even a different setting. That's the beauty of fiction isn't it? He can just borrow from it and continue to be creative (that's why the show was good right?) just don't remake it.
...as if millions of geeks suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
What series had flying motorcycles? Wasn't that the third incarnation of the US Robotech? I have no idea what anime that was originally.
oh, yes, Jayne, I've heard of him
The man they call Jayne...
He robbed from the rich
and he gave to the poor.
Stood up to the man
and gave him what for
. Our love for him now
ain't hard to explain.
The hero of Canton
the man they call Jayne.
Our Jayne saw the mudders' backs breakin'.
He saw the mudders'lament.
And he saw the Magistrate takin'
every dollar and leavin' five cents.
So he said "You can't do that to my people."
He said "You can't crush them under your heel."
So Jayne strapped on his hat
and in 5 seconds flat
stole everythin' Boss Higgins had to steal.
He robbed from the rich
and he gave to the poor.
Stood up to the man
and gave him what for.
Our love for him now
ain't hard to explain.
The hero of Canton
the man they call Jayne.
Now here is what separates heroes
from common folk like you and I.
The man they call Jayne
he turned 'round his plane
and let that money hit sky.
He dropped it onto our houses
he dropped it into our yards
. The man they called Jayne
he stole away our pain
and headed out for the stars!
Here we go!
He robbed from the rich
and he gave to the poor.
Stood up to the man
and gave him what for.
Our love for him now
ain't hard to explain.
The hero of Canton
the man they call Jayne.
There are so many people who rave about Buffy and Firefly and sometimes I feel like I am not understanding why these people still feel these are good shows. THEY SUCK. The writing is mediocre the plots are cliche and the actors are B at best. What the hell is wrong with you people?! Am I the only nerd who sees that some people are seriously misguided and insane?
I feel like the bad guy in zoolander who was the only one who realized that all the "looks" were the FUCKING SAME....
Ave Molech Setting
Just visual memory, I could easily be wrong.
Mod this up.
because parent just said exactly what I was going to say, on every count. And really, personally I really liked that they actually killed the characters off. In some ways that made the movie for me; these characters live in a dangerous world, it just seems so fake in so many similar cases of fiction where the characters just refuse to fucking die when you'd think someone would have been shot by now, yaknow? Both deaths seemed utterly natural to the world, and that really helped sell it as something more than just hollow escapism. Now, I'm not denying that alot of Firefly fans are there for that, but that's never why I liked the series.
I remember sigs. Oh, a simpler time!
Because of that, I too am okay with this being the end. I'd certainly love more movies to come, or a show, but if not, then I've at least got the closure.
"Curse your sudden, but inevitable betrayal!"
This is straight from Joss himself on Whedonesque: All right, now I have to jump in and set the record straight. EW is a fine rag, but they do take things out of context. Obviously when I said I had 'closure', what I meant was "I hate Serenity, I hated Firefly, I think my fans are stupid and Nathan Fillion smells like turnips." But EW's always got to put some weird negative spin on it. But so we're clear once and for all: If you read a quote saying "I'd love to do more in this 'verse with these actors in any medium" all I'm saying is that Nathan has a turnipy odor. It's not his fault, he doesn't eat a lot of them but everyone else in the cast noticed it and tht's not really something I'm prepared to deal with any more. And Jewel said outright she wouldn't do scenes with him except stuff like the SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER funeral scene which was outside in a high SPOILER wind. So if I do manage to find another incarnation for my beloved creation, it will have been totally against my will. I hope that clears everything up. Oh, and when I say I want to do a Spike movie, it means I have a bunion on my toe. -joss (by which I mean Tim) (no, actually me.) joss | December 21, 02:12 CET You see? EW can stop stirring up contraversy and just bugger off for all I care.
So then the next season should be a spinfoff all about Jayne?
Obviously you have absolutely no taste. Battlefield Earth was a good movie, but Firefly sucked? So I guess that money should have gone to what? Deep Space Nine: The Resurrection? Or simply a Battlefield Earth: The Series?
Do you *really* want to have a whole long discussion about this here? Well, I have no self-control so I'm going to go for it
1. If anything I felt that it showed the core audience that this was not an episode of a TV series, where much could be expected to end up the same at the end as at the beginning.
I suppose that's valid, but people campaigned hard to get Firefly back. Serenity was not Firefly. For some people that's fine. For others it's not fine: the loved Firefly and they missed those aspects of it that they had fallen in love with. The most quoted aspect is warmth. The show, and the ship itself, seemed colder in the movie. And for others it's just main characters. You don't kill Han Solo off in A New Hope because the character is so great for the movie. Killing him off in Return of the Jedi would have been a bummer, but not nearly as bad a decision.
I don't see how new viewers can have been a factor in the decision to let them die. New viewers would have gotten the same effect of seriousness if new characters had been added and then killed. There was no way to add anymore new characters, Wheddon had a hard enough time getting all of the essential cast in (some say he failed at that, but with 9 characters to introduce again I think he did well). So in order for the show to be a Hollywood action flick with an ensemble case, SOMEONE had to die. That's the formula, and in the sense that making this a Hollywood action flick is for the newbies, killing Wash as part of that final-action tension-raising plot tool was definately for those newbies.
2. Also, River had been shown as having a 'super weapon' mode in the Firefly series, where she closed her eyes and killed three armed troops with three shots in about one second, so the movie was not 'turning' her into something new.
In this case you're preaching to the choir. I personally LOVED that scene - it brings a lump to my throat every time River says "My turn" and then goes off and kicks major Reaver butt. Plus the action sequences are just incredible with her - some of the best I've ever seen. I was just trying to add that for the sake of completeness because I know a lot of fans disliked it. And they have a point too, it would have been hard to have had characters like Jayn and Zoe matter so much as the hired muscle now that River the kick-ass assasin can do more damage than both of them combined. And any attempt to have limited her powers would have seemed a little too artificial and comic-bookish. She just recovered from being nut-case, how are they going to make her be one again?
All in all I had a really hard time liking the movie because of what happened to Wash. But that was because I wanted to see more movies. I was hoping the movie would do well and they'd relaunch the series. Or try something genuinely ground-breaking and do direct-to-DVD episodes. But the movie was sweet, and now that it's the conclusion to the series I like it even more.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
He's got good taste it's a beautiful song :)
this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
More please
I hate that publishers that own rights to something can just squat on not only that "intellectual" property but any derivative work.
How on earth does this sort of thing Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts?!
I know that the ideals of copyright were basically thrown out when it was extended the first time, but this sounds like a built in feature, and I just don't see it helping anyone, including the publisher.
Seriously, I remember when the first previews came out, and every time I tried to talk to anyone who was lucky enough to see it, when I asked them about it, all I got was a ashen-faced forlorn look. Evenually, when you learn that they kill off several characters, you can't help but think...WTF was Whedon smoking?
Okay, I'm the last person to feel like we need to have cushy Star Trek rules where everyone lives that's a main character and only nameless red shirts die. I'm perfectly fine with major characters getting axed in a series...although you always hope it happens on the writer's terms and not because one of the actors dies (so sad, West Wing). But killing off a main character to fans is the like charging $20,000 on your credit card. That better be a damn spectactual investment that pays dividends in the long run that make up the cost. Otherwise, you've left a real goodwill vacuum.
Personally, I was I think most upset that Shepard Book was killed off. He was a great character, an walking apparent contradiction between his current peacemaker role and apparently some military past life (showing his ID card to the Alliance doctors to get someone medical treatment). The character Book gave a nice calm anchor to provide sage advice and comfort. Who would take his place? Is Jayne going to wax poetic when they face some great evil? So, killing of Book...which I would totally accept on its own...was a really ballsy move. The only way to make up for it would be to introduce a new "father figure" or similar replacement. But the movie didn't do that, or even hint at it.
Then they killed off Mr. Universe or whatever his name was, and a host of virtually every other bit character from the original series. This is the salt-the-earth style I'm talking about. Maybe none of those characters were worth a spit, but they were established coordinates on the Firefly roadmap. The movie only really introduced one new location, and it was devoid of human inhabitants. So it's like Firefly might as well be alone in the galaxy as far as relative relationships. If the movie had done well and a new series was greenlighted...it would have literally been like day one having to introduce a raft of new characters to replace all of the ones you wastefully killed off. Again, it could be done, but...only if the payoff is worth it.
And finally, killing off Wash. And doing in the most offhanded, insulting "ooga boogy" way possible. "Well I guess we're all OKAYAAAAAAAAAAHOMG (die)" That was just crap writing. And Zoe who was willing to storm the citiadel of some well armed private army to save him, just turned and walked away leaving his corpse to well known reaver necrophiliacs? One person who saw and early screened said..."I would have totally bought his death 100% if like at his gravesite Zoe had calmed cut off her ring finger with wedding ring and left it on his grave" I totally agree. It was like he was a total minor character in how his death was handled. And, maybe he wasn't a major character, but his marriage to Zoe had to at least elevate him higher than Simon, River, or even Jewel.
So, in my opinion, what killed Firefly is that as a mainstream movie, it didn't have the trite happy ending that the mainstream wants. And as a fan movie, it burned a season worth of fan goodwill for absolutely no reason at all. It had the plot of a mid-season extended episode, but it had the resolution of a series finale. And so, that's what it became. As a true Firefly fan...I honestly don't know if I would want whatever Firefly series would have had to follow that movie. If I were to close my eyes and dream at all now, it will be for a Firefly prequel about the war and the history Browncoats.
Firefly, in the end, was like Cowboy Bebop...an amazing ride, but written in such a way that when its over...its over.
- JoeShmoe
-- I wonder which will go down in history as the bigger failure: the War on Drugs or the War on Filesharing
Most people love soap operas, these sorry excuses of shows (Buffy, Firefly) are just that.
And the movie (Serenity0 that I have the displeasure to watch is so lame that I feel vindicated when I check the box office sales.
Such crappy movie deserves to lose money. All of it if possible.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
A lot of people I know who can be counted on for an SF movie didn't know what it was and from the name of it thought it was a chick flick. With Buffy The Vampire Slayer you instantly got it. With Serenity, if you didn't know, you didn't get it, and the core audience wasn't big enough for the name of the movie to be an inside joke.
Thanks, I thought it was funny too.
Is here. His comment begins "All right, now I have to jump in and set the record straight"
Actually, it's more like "We won't make it, and we won't allow anyone else to make it, because it's ours. We don't care that it might make or lose money for someone else. It's our football, and nobody else gets to play with it."
Come on. It sucks that the show is dead, but Mr. Whedon did make a deal, and he did make a lot of money. When Josh sold Firefly to Fox he was just coming from Buffy and Angel, both very succesful (Buffy more so, of course.) I guarantee his deal was for six figures, if not seven. Universal probably got a better deal since the show wasn't so much of a hit, but it probably wasn't cheap to negotiate either. He could have held out for an option that returns the property back to him after a period of inactivity (though the major studios may or may not have gone for that.) Or better yet, he could have gone to Sci-Fi or another cable channel in the first place and got a deal that would have been more to his favor-- and put the show on in a place that would have a better chance of nurturing it, where a small but loyal fan base could carry a show. If he really felt this was a story that must be told he could have arranged for independant financing, produced the film himself and held on to all of the rights. He did not do that. He went for the major studio money and made a fair deal on their terms, knowing full well that the stakes are higher and most ideas don't make it. Yes, it's theirs and they can say what the future of Firefly/Serenity is... But the studios did invest quite a bit of money and time into productions that had a chance and failed. Why should they be expected to give back the rights? Because a relatively small fan base wants them to? Does Whedon even want them back?
Did the studios give the property a fair shake? Fox didn't, IMHO, but at least it was on the air for a while, which is more than most good ideas can say. Universal promoted it pretty heavily but it still tanked. Maybe this is just an idea that wasn't meant to find a mass audience. Anyway, Whedon's a creative guy, I'm sure he has more projects in the works.
This little blurb seems completely contrary to
http://whedonesque.com/comments/9027 and
http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=22059 (look towards bottom of article).
The only part im sad about is it seems Joss had plans for 2 more and if thats true then there must have been more plot to explore but now we'll never know
This reminds me of something which others here might find amusing... after having recently watched the Firefly episodes, the episode commentaries, and the movie, I somehow got the half-baked idea that Inara is a vampire, or a succubus, or some other sort of supernatural creature. Whedon's other shows, Buffy and Angel, are pretty obviously in the same universe, but there's nothing solid tying Firefly to that same universe... or is there?
The evidence I collected is pretty poor/circumstantial, but as a whole it's rather interesting to muse about, I think:
* In the "Out of Gas" episode, there's a scene where the doctor (Simon) and Inara are chatting about their inevitable demise. On the commentary the director of that episode mentions that there was a clue to something about Inara which didn't get expanded on in the show. During this scene the following dialog takes place:
Inara: I love this ship. I have from the first moment I saw it.
Simon: I just don't want to die on it.
Inara: I don't want to die at all.
I might be imagining things, but IMHO Inara sounds kind of sinister when she says that, as if she really doesn't plan on dying.
* I might be wrong on this, but I can't recall any time that Inara appears outside in the sun with exposed skin. The one time I recall her being outside was in "Trash," where she appears outside wearing a veil. (Now that I think about it though, there might be an exception in "Shindig" during the duel...)
* In the pilot, when Firefly passes by Reavers and everybody thinks they're about to die, Inara pulls out a little case which looks like a suicide kit. In the commentary the director says it's not a suicide kit, but actually a secret about Inara which would've been revealed later. It doesn't look like the sort of weapon you'd use to fight off Reavers, so perhaps it's something supernatural?
* In the commentary, one of the directors mentions how Inara was supposed to be played in a way which showed her as having more wisdom than someone her age to have, wisdom beyond her years. This could just mean that she's smart, but could also have other connotations.
* In Serenity, Inara fights using a weapon which rapidly switches between being a bow and a crossbow. The rapid switching is probably a blooper, but in any case, a bow/crossbow is a pretty anachronistic weapon, even for Firefly.
So yeah, the "evidence" I have is pretty fragmentary, and there's alternative explanations for just about all of it. It's pretty obvious though that Whedon had some sort of deep, dark secret in Inara's past that he didn't have a chance to reveal. What are your thoughts? Can anyone else think of things to support/refute this?
Hollywood films generally make the majority of their money in the first weekend, so that overlong and indulgent films do not lose out (Think "Titanic") I have a suspicion that there's more money to be made in the King Kong video game(s) therefore the long action scenes are appropriate as a vehicle for selling merchandise. I suspect you know less about Hollywood than you think.
I watched Battlestar:Galactica once. Whereas Firefly strikes a chord with me because it is both sci-fi and a wonderful drama suffused with humanity, Battlestar seemed like it was trying to strike a chord by being both sci-fi and edgy political commentary or something. The Cylons have to be metaphors for terrorists, etc. This is why I didn't like it: although both Firefly and Battlestar go way beyond sci-fi and tap into our lives today, Firefly does this by exploring what it is to be human. Battlestar just does this by exploring today's (imagined?) culture of fear, distrust, and paranoia. I'm sure that could make good sci-fi; in fact, I'm sure that's made good sci-fi. I just feel like Battlestar is something I've watched before: an explicit attempt to take elements of our modern lives and marry them to spaceships. Firefly doesn't try to draw parallels to today; instead, it makes the future believable in terms of how we've acted and always acted. To me, it's the difference between rewriting The West Wing in the future, and doing something original.
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
even tho it's been really really high on the amazon best seller list, it's only sold 500,000 (as of last september)... less than what i'd expect for being as "high" on the amazon list for as long as it has been...
Michelle Forbes played Ensign Ro on Star Trek: The Next Generation, as well as various other parts over the years, including a part in 'Escape from LA'.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Y'know, that's really, really interesting. I'd never thought of it that way, and if a bold of lightning falls from the cloudless sky and makes me into a TV writer, I promise that I will in fact explore character development through events that cast a long, long shadow.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Lost is brilliant, from a TV network executives level (shit-for-brains). It is probably the first sucessful attempt at a surreal, Twin Peaks type of show that works. (The original TP didn't.) What storylines in Lost do you find had incredibly poor, predictable, stilted dialog? Did you hate the Twilight Zone? I can't think of anything more "predictable" that a series of morality play vignettes. Or do you mean by "spoon-feeding" that you hate the writers dragging out the storylines in the show? (Which is not the proper application of the expression "spoon-feeding".)
And to put Angel in the class of "horribly written"??? The dialogue was great & snappy (with hideous flaws in some instances), just like BtVS, but it was a film noir type of show. If you don't like the feel of detective stories of the '30s-'50s, if you don't like inner moral conflict and the nature of moral philosophy, you're not going to like Angel.
(I'm not going to defend BtVS. I wasn't a teenage adolescent girl, and I didn't find high school as the most formative period of my life. But the writing was fine (up to season 5), and its the iconic showcase for Whedon's writing talent.)
Firefly did not have "realistic" dialogue. For openers, none of my friends or co-workers are that witty. You'd have to wade through twenty years of my life to glean the equivalent amount witticisms in one episode of Firefly. And action shows are not my definition of high entertainment. More like how the drooling masses entertain themselves.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
I've always wanted to make a "mod parent up" post
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
Creators have control of their inventions until such time as they freely give up the rights to them. If they choose to bargain with their inventions, that's their own choice to make. If rights couldn't be voluntarily transferred, they would lose much of their value, and intellectual creation would become less and less of a viable career.
To say that situations like this are an affront to copyright's mission is similar to saying that selling some unknown valuable antique at a yard sale for five bucks is an affront to commerce. It might've been the wrong decision to make, but the fault is solely on the people involved in the transaction.
If nothing else, this does mean that new and better things have to be made, since the original rights are locked up. Progress isn't about standing in the same place.
Information wants to be free.
Entertainment wants to be paid.
You just want to be cheap.
First off: A septembre release is not an effort, that's the friday 8pm timeslot all over again.
Secondly, what the hell is up with that poster? Who is that? Is that supposed to be River? Hard to tell.
And finally, relying on viral marketig whilst at the same time bumming out all the fans by killing off one of the characters in a very powerfull movie moment. Seriously, depressed fanboys are not a good marketing move.
You can't take the sky from me...
Those 4.5% were right, though. The series (Firefly) is very good (a couple of episodes are bad, a couple are brilliant), but the movie was a piece of crap. It was as if they took one of the bad episodes (like "The message" or "Out of gas"), stretched out the plot holes, ridiculous plot devices (Mr. Universe? Puh-leeze!) and just plain stupid parts until it was the right length for a film, and didn't even bother to add more jokes or witty dialogue.
I have to wonder if James "plot hole" Cameron managed to infect the script, somehow. At least Cameron can direct action sequences (the space battles in Serenity are depressingly bad, and even the fight sequences only manage to be passable thanks to Summer Glau's natural ability - the direction, editing and coreography are very poor).
I suspect the people who gave Serenity a positive score were fans of the series, who were just glad to get a new "fix".
Serenity is not just bad because of what it is (and it is very bad - the fact that other recent sci-fi is terrible doesn't make it good), but also because of what it could have been, and because of all the bridges it burns (not just the characters, but the whole "universe"). Any fan of the series could have written a better plot for the film.
If I had seen Serenity before Firefly, I wouldn't have bothered to watch Firefly at all (and Firefly is probably my favourite sci-fi series of the last 15 years).
If Serenity was what Whedon had in mind for Firefly, I'm glad the series died there. Now excuse me while I watch "Our Mrs. Reynolds" for the 7th time.
How on earth does this sort of thing Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts?
It forces competitors to come up with something new and something better.
You want to write a successful series of children's books? You don't need Narnia and you don't need Hogwarts: A Series of Unfortunate Events
Here's the full text of Joss's own reply:
It had a hard-core fanatical fanbase, but one that's pretty small. Recall that the Boxofficemojo numbers are raw box office; studio keeps about half of everything (around 75% first weekend). Add to that some substantial marketing costs for both film and for any DVD promotion and you have a financial loser.
It wasn't fun, feel-good entertainment and couldn't break out of it's sub-cult fanbase because all the things that made the hard-core love it turned off the wider audience: too contemptous of various American cultural norms and behaviors, etc. Like right, wrong, good-guy and bad-guy. With no heroes only anti-heroes it was never going to do well.
For DVDs to be hits they need the aisle-caps of Wal-Mart and Best Buy. That's reality. Wal-Mart is going to look at the box office and say no thanks. That's the way it is.
So yeah Joss is unable to get wider acceptance from the general audience, he's not alone. Most of Hollywood is in a paradox. Their off-the-scale talents in writing or directing or what have you give them great success and wealth, which tends to make them isolated and contemptous of the ordinary people who made them successful in the first place. See: Steven Spielberg, Peter Jackson, Oliver Stone, etc.
The "Long Tail Model" will NEVER work for Firefly / Serenity until/unless production costs drop so dramatically that you can make money off a million or so hard core fans. And the actors aren't working for free. Neither will the crew. Even then, which would you rather have? A film/tv-show that draws 20-40 million fans, or one that draws a million? Success in the entertainment business still centers around a mass audience.
Since the website colors his name, I can assume he's the real Joss?
Now here is what seperates Heroes,
From common folk like you and I
The man they called Jayne, he turned around his plane
And let that money hit sky
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
Ummm... you do realize that there's nothing that Whedon could do that would have kept Wash alive, don't you? He doesn't own Alan Tudyk and Tudyk wanted to move on.
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
There are far too many TV shows that last for too long. They just peter out and die. Bob Newhart stopped the Bob Newhart show because he didn't want it to become stale. So he went and started a new show. I think that's great for Whedon. Most fans of Buffy would agree that it shouldn't have gone on for as long as it has. Simpsons is another great example of a show that has become worse with age. Stop while you're ahead. There are always new oceans to sail.
I think you're the one trying too hard to marry these things up. Of all the groups in the Battlestar Galactica series universe that could be compared to terrorists, the Cylons wouldn't be terribly close to the top of the list. Although, particularly in several of the on-Caprica episodes, I thought they came off pretty close to Nazis, with their experimentation on people and all. Terrible beings, yes, but not really anything like terrorists.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
B5 was produced under its budget, which was half the budget of Star Trek:TNG, which was half the budget of Firefly. Firefly only avoided the issue with aliens in rubber masks because they had no aliens at all. You may complain about the makeup in B5, but they did win three Emmys for it. (Well-deserved, I thought. Sometimes the effects didn't work at all, like N'grath in the first season, but sometimes they really did, like the Narn makeup.) Also, eight years in the evolution of cheap computer graphics is a long, long time. It'd be just as unfair to compare the effects from Battlestar Galactica (the new one) to those from Star Trek:DS9.
But some of the things that made Firefly great also made Babylon 5 great, like a series composer who could give a uniform feel to the show which you just can't get without a dedicated musician. (The X-Files and BtVS benefitted from Mark Snow and Christopher Beck, respectively, in the same way.)
What really got me about Firefly was that Babylon 5 was barely watchable in its first season. Oh, there were good ideas in there, but the acting was occasionally terrible, the tone was all over the place, and the creator didn't seem to have a consistent idea of what he was doing. But it picked up considerably from about episode 13 ("Signs and Portents"). Yes, there were bad episodes after that, but the arc had started up, and I was hooked. And unlike, say, on The X-Files, there was actually a plan behind the arc, other than "drag the audience around until they notice there's no man behind the curtain".
Firefly, by contrast, was dead brilliant from its very first act. And that's what made me so, so sad, because there's so much that's been lost, so much that could have been... and now won't be. Broke my damn heart at the end of "Objects in Space", when I knew there weren't no more t' be had.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
i just wonder how the series did on dvd, and how the movie isgoing to do...
Loved the TV show, and I loved the movie, have it playing right now. :)
If the show is over thats ok, I have the DVD's and the hope Joss comes up with more and better shows.
I understand he was tired of the Buffyverse and had to take a break. Fine. Who wouldn't be. But in the end, a man has gotta accept his calling.
Sci-Fi is about breaking the constraints and tired plots of conventional stories. This means [constraints and tired plots of conventional sci-fi stories].
I do agree with you, by the way; I think tales of "eternal human verities" which translate into "people making the same stupid mistakes" aren't very inspiring or uplifting, even if they're supposed to be. I just don't think Firefly falls into that category simply because it lacks aliens, robots and time travel.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
The DVD came out today (Dec. 20), and this article appeared in the print edition of Entertainment Weekly last Friday (Dec. 16).
But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
Zoe and Jayne would still be the hired muscle. In both ass-kicking scenes River was set off by some event (either the subliminal message or her brother getting shot). She's a loaded weapon, but someone still needs to pull the trigger.
But you and a couple other posts a little up the thread are exactly right and I'm surprised that so many Firefly fans missed it: River was a weapon and the series was just starting to make that apparent. The gun scene where she kills 3 guys after only a quick glance (and then not looking again while firing) was a dead give-away to at least one of her "special abilities" "give" to her by the Alliance.
Killing off Book wasn't so much a tragedy as Wash since Book was already on his way out, but has anyone considered that Alan who played Wash didn't want to continue? Would fans be happier if they stuck someone else in the part (like a new O'Niel and Jackson from the movie to the show (don't get me wrong, I like both actors in the show better anyway))? I seriously doubt it.
I first heard of Firefly here on Slashdot. I don't watch a lot of TV. I got curious and downloaded the whole series, and an early TC of the film, off the Usenet.
I was knocked out. Flawed heroes, villains with a bit of depth, terrific music in the series [so-so in the film, IMHO], and the 'cowboy' thing juxtaposed against the 'futuristic' environment was realistic. [think about it, the World and all of its people will never be on anything like the same wavelength, technologically speaking]. Example: The Russian peasants didn't fight the Panzer divisions, in the early 40s, with sticks and pitchforks out of some innate urge to live out 'cowboy' romanticism.
I bought the series in DVD form as a birthday gift for my daughter. And the DVD of the film will go out to her as a holiday gift, also. It was a terrific series, well-written, the crew obviously took their work seriously, the cast was marvelous, and the story was a nice post-Enlightenment look at people, flawed and heroically fabulous, in crises. Very well done, and I'll miss it like old friends, like family, as corny as that sounds. [and I'm old enough to know better...but...]
Don't Panic!
It appears that Joss was taken way out of context.
http://whedonesque.com/comments/9027
That was when he figured that he needed to invoke the Dead and Evil Lesbian Cliche. And he did it an old and stupid way. At least when J. Michael Straczynski invoked it, he did so in a new and different way. (The Dead Lesbian and the Evil Lesbian were the same character.) I can't imagine what purpose it served or... or anything. It's like he fears that the fans will start adoring him too much, so he occasionally delivers a nut shot so they won't.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
I don't even want none of the above. I want to piss on you. ... R. Kelly?
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
For DVDs to be hits they need the aisle-caps of Wal-Mart and Best Buy. That's reality. Wal-Mart is going to look at the box office and say no thanks. That's the way it is.
That's funny; I learned about the release date from the poster put right at the front of my local Wal-Mart, on those "inventory protection" posts, where they market the upcoming movies and video games. Must only be my Wal-Mart, then.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Hiiiiiicks iiiiiin ssssspaaaaaceeee!
Good riddance - perhaps we can now move on to a show that doesn't actually suck. I hope Joss doesn't pollute television with any more crap.
That's what killed the movie's box office take. Did anyone see the advertising they put out for it? If that's Universal's "best marketing efforts" I'd hate to see their worst. The TV ads were some of the worst ever.
The Farewell Tour II
your sudden but inevitable one-liner.
-------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.
Michelle Forbes is (IMHO) much prettier now, as compared to when she played Ro Laren. Longer hair looks good on her.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
Yes, it's the real Joss. I've been a Whedonesque member long enough to say that with some authority. Here's the direct link, btw.
"Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing."
Here's the direct link to that wonderful statement: http://whedonesque.com/comments/9027#101124
"Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing."
There's more to it than that. If you've been involved with the industry then you know that personal politics, whims, and downright mean-spiritedness have a great deal to do with cancellations and refusals to sell as well. This is an industry where profit often *isn't* the bottom line and where individuals will often torpedo working projects to push a personal agenda, or simply to stick it to someone they don't like.
For example, it's a rather well-known (in the industry) fact that "Dark Angel" wasn't cancelled due to ratings but because a certain powerful executive (a woman who still works in the business) harbored a very public hatred of Jessica Alba. Public in the sense of that it made the rounds in business as a recurring bit of gossip, not public in the sense that you, Joe Smith, know about it. She made it one of her primary goals to sink that show any way she could. What's mildly amusing about this is that she's acquired a reputation for doing this sort of thing, and at least a half-dozen cancellations are attributed to her vindictiveness because the shows featured a woman she didn't like. Not that she doesn't like Ms. Alba because of some unpleasant personal interaction (they've never met, to my knowledge), but because Ms. Alba is extraordinarily gorgeous - and she despises gorgeous women. Especially strong-willed gorgeous women, and most of all strong-willed gorgeous women that fellow male executives drool over and talk about to each other within the range of this vipers hearing.
No names, but her pecadillos have reached the point where a bit of google searching can turn up the very same info I've just related, along with some of the shows that've been on her hit list (apart from "Dark Angel").
This is not an unusual thing. Many shows do just fine ratings-wise, yet get cancelled despite the fact that they make money. The reasons are usually rooted in the malicious behavior of executives more enamored of power than of money. Others are appalling (e.g., "Enterprise") but are kept because someone on the show (in this case, Berman) knows where some very, very embarrassing bodies are buried.
When it comes to television, don't attribute to stupidity what can instead be ascribed to petty evil. Nine times of out ten the reasons are firmly rooted in petty evil.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
I also had no idea who Joss Whedon was before I saw Firefly on DVD. I didn't really watch Buffy or Angel until after seeing Firefly, and didn't realize they were made by the same guy. Personally I thought Buffy was absolutely fantastic but Angel wasn't really that great (Angel took itself far too seriously, and I have a hard time taking vampires and demons seriously).
Anyway, yeah, I didn't get into any of this because of Joss - but now that I know who he is, you can bet I'll watch whatever he makes next.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Entertainment Weekly may be calling Serenity a failure and Joss Wheedon may be washing his hands of this project, but that doesn't change the fact that out of two Blockbusters and a Hollywood video in my town, none of them had copies to rent. All were checked out today...
...as if millions of geeks suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
Seriously. Firefly = same guy who wrote Buffy. Trying SF. With cowboys.
Major suckage. Futurama must return!
-- No Sig is a Good Sig
Not shown in Europe, and I mean large parts of the continent with that. In my region (6 million people) it was shown in 2 (TWO) theatres with no (NO) publicity. Had do drive 70 km at 22u to see this movie the second week it was out. Was worth it though. No wonder the international box office is low. I did take 4 non SF fans who also never saw Buffy with me. They all liked or loved the movie and had no regrets....(well except for the killing of Wash, that's indeed something that gives many people on an instinctif level a bad feeling)
> Killing Wash in a way that many felt was pointless
It set up that any of the main characters might die, which upped the suspense. So when Kayle gets shot by the Reavers in the neck, you don't know if she's gonna make it. Same with Simon getting a gut shot and River taken by the reavers.
I don't like the movie nearly as much as episodes like Out of gas, War stories, Our Mrs Reynold... not because Wash was killed, but because it was too James Bond/Pinky and the Brain/Bruce Willisey with people doing impossible things, instead of being the people history stepped on like in the series.
I call bullshit on this one. Most people I know never heard of the movie. When I went to the theater, there was no movie poster nor a listing on the Marque. The screen number that it was showing in, rather than having a lit sign over the number, had a hand written tag taped to the light, and this is no "small" theater. This was the largest in the area.
I was very much awaiting Serenity so that I could go see it with a bunch of my friends but it never appeared in any theaters in Finland! There was mention of it for a short time on one of the movie distributors webpages http://www.sandrewmetronome.fi/ but it disappeared shortly after. Obviously the movie was dropped. I also consulted the main movie theater company http://www.finnkino.fi/ about the movie but they had no knowledge of serenity or whether it was coming (and that was on november).
How are they going to get viewers for the movie when the movie can't be seen in any theater!? The potential certainly was there - the Firefly series has been shown on nationwide TV just this year!
I've already seen Serenity (thanks to p2p networks) and I thought it was great - I'll probably buy the DVD on January/February next year when it's released in Europe. And the complete series along with it.
It would have been nice to even have had a chance to see it.
Wouldnt any comments on how well the film did have made more sense after the dvd sales figures come in? Quite a few film do badly at the cinema but sell truck loads on dvd
I'm very curious about this. Could I trouble you for an email (can be found on my site fairly easily) or a few more terms that I could google for to fill in the missing pieces?
"Buffy fans, in my experience, aren't really open to the kind of fine-distinctions you're talking about"
I think you are praps not being completely totally honest here maybe?
Because if Buffy fans are known for anything, it's overthinking.
... So frankly I'm not sure he is serious about the turnip thing either
There is no-way I can even begin to beleave that it is the end of firefly. Has anyone ever thought of making a fan-series? If a site was set up where donations could be made I would definately donate.
You can't take the sky from me (and if you try I'll shut my eyes, put my fingers in my ears and go lalalalalala)
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
I was just thinking the same. I haven't seen the firefly series or the movie. I did like the original Buffy once upon a time but not sure if W wrote that one as well...?
I hate both Buffy and Angel, which are series for teenage girls. Because of that I am pretty unsure if I would dare spend 2 hours of my life finding out if the Serenity movie is good. What to do!?
Whedon wrote the screenplay for the Buffy movie then watched as the studio (or someone else, not sure) tore it apart. That's why he made the tv show, he felt that it hadn't been used the way he wanted so he told his story through the series. Buffy is a bit too silly for me sometimes, I really liked the 10 or so episodes of Angel I caught. Anyway, you should be able to pick up the Firefly box set for about the same price as the Serenity DVD, I know here in the UK the Firefly box set is being sold in one store at £17.99, Serenity will likely cost £15 or so. This would be much better value for money, plus then if you enjoy the series you can decide whether to pay for another two hours and see Serenity.
Walsh: We gotta go to the crappy town where I'm a hero!
With the first link, the chain is forged.
The movie did nothing more than the TV series did. It is a great TV show and they SHOULD bring it back. The movie was so so at best. And Wash dying really nuked the funny outta the show.
I'd take the tv show back instead.
That darn Slashdot is so cool... Hey did you pay the phone *(#(Q%$#$ NO CARRIER
The movie can still be the "end" of the series, and they can still make more episodes!
If Firefly were to come back for more episodes, they could just pick up where the normal episodes left off, with Walsh and Book alive. Just say the events in the movie take place years in the future. It's not the end of the world even if they do fuck with the timeline; think about how popular Highlander is/was with the sci-fi crowd, and it's timeline is ALL fucked up.
With the first link, the chain is forged.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Funny, but I have a similar experience. I didn't know anything about FireFly but checked out the first series on a whim from my local library. After seeing the very first two hour premere, I was instantly hooked. I loved the how the show was set in a gritty universe like the original StarWars. I'm not a big country western lover, but I thought the cut scene music had a fresh appeal. My only gripe might be how every planet seemed to have horses...but I guess that just goes with the music. Anyhow, I instantly loved the series. Now I come to slashdot and hear how the series is dead? That's a total bummer. Finally, something I can enjoy and it's gone. However, after hearing a few spoilers about the demise of the series, I suppose I'm not too disappointed. Buffy was a nice show that I never liked, because I don't care for the super chic heros that are so over played these days. Then I hear the same director made Angle...another show I never cared to watch. So when I hear they make River into another super chic hero...or illude to that effect...that just kinda kills the whole thing for me. I liked the show initially because everyone was normal. No super powers or anything stupid like that. Granted, I've only seen the first series and I have no Buffy or Angle experience, but it sounds like I can draw one conclusion....Joss seems to follow this same pattern for every thing he does...all have super chic heros. Yeah, sound like Wonder Woman will be his next movie....and of course I won't care for it. I was so excited about FireFly being this new scifi made with normal characters...now I'm just a bit dissappointed.
Ms. Alba is extraordinarily gorgeous - and she despises gorgeous women. Especially strong-willed gorgeous women, and most of all strong-willed gorgeous women that fellow male executives drool over and talk about to each other within the range of this vipers hearing.
If I had clout in the industry, I would do everything I could to kill any show with Joe Rogan. Could someone with power please get rid of him somewhere outside of Las Vegas or something?
Well, no, but dude, I linked you to an academic journal. So your point is slightly lost on me. Is it, and this is just a guess, I'm right and anyone who disagrees with me is dumb, or excluded from validity in some arbitrary way, because I'm *right*, dammit ?
Because that's always fun! And useful! :/
Those sites are talking about lots of things, not just saying "Wheddon [sic], why do you make me cry! I love you!", which is what you said you had mostly encountered.
Look at the three Whedon television shows (Serenity included) and you will see one glaring detail.
If there is one thing that Joss loves to do, it's to get people really engrossed in the characters and then kill them off. Both Buffy and Angel have each died twice and many other side characters have bit the big one in many ways; some very touching and others just pointless.
Joss even teased us with Mal's death in the movie back in June 2004.
Without advance spoilers, I watched the movie knowing full well that some of the beloved crew would not be coming out alive. The deaths in the movie could be used to convey a sense of realism; the idea that everyone dies, even loved ones. They could also just be included because Joss is a sadist and never got to kill anyone when the show was on TV.
it's good storytelling. You can't tease viewers with life or death situations if your main characters are invulnerable. Wash's death was gut wrenching to fans but it also set up the final part of the movie where you really had no clue if they were going to make it. That, my friend, is why they died.
As for Serenity, ''I have closure,'' he says.
And so do I. Thanks for a great run Joss.
I'll be looking forward to whatever's next.
-----------
(Seriously, guys, give it up already. Firefly/Serenity is over. Joss had a chance to wrap up the big mysteries for us. Let's be greatful for that and move on.)
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Funny, I just watched "Shindig" last night. In the dueling scene, they were outside but under the shade of some large trees. I don't know the rules for Vampires in Whedon's universe so I don't know if that supports your theory or not.
Now my thoughts: Whedon definitely made the "Companions" very alluring and mysterious. They had this great political power or is it an upper hand (in "Shindig" she rotorts to the guy who Mal beats in the duel "It doesn't work like that! You will never have the services of another Companion ever again" (big time paraphrase)? In the begining of that episode, she was in a filthy bar filled with shady folks sitting up on a stool looking very regal. One would think that would be very bad place for a hot upper class woman to be sitting, and she was very relaxed with no worries. Does this mean she's got some upper hand (super weapon, powers, just being a certified companion makes people lay off?) or does it mean that she is relaxed when Mal is around to protect her or does it mean she isn't very bright? Probably not the last one.
Anyway, she was an interesting character with a lot of potential for where it could go (I never thought about your suggestion before which goes to show that potential) and she will make a great Wonder Woman if Whedon decideds to cast her.
I only mod up parents of "mod parent up" posts...
You should know that if you've seen the first season of Firefly then you've seen it all, there was never a second season. Serenity, the movie (not the pilot episode of the same name) was the first new Firefly in years. So if you've seen the whole series then you know that River didn't get made into a super chic hero. They gave her more action in the film, but I think Joss had to do that to get more interest from people who weren't fans, I assure you it doesn't swamp the film with River kicking ass - it's very tightly confined to a few minutes. Anyway, really I guess I'm just saying that if you made the investment to watch the series and enjoyed it I think it'd be a shame not to watch Serenity just because you "heard" that they'd spoiled the series. Lots of fans loved the movie, so it's not as clear cut as "Whedon sold out" or anything like that.
Practice random acts of ineffability.
He's talking about Gail Berman, who has been responsible for the death of most of those great Fox shows, and who recently left to run Paramount.
Well, I only watched half an episode. I got all this from a New York Times Magazien article on Battlestar:Galactica, which talked about the climate of the show matching up closely to today's political climate etc.
Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
Who's Joss Whedon?
Man, where can I contribute to THAT effort? I used to just have to avoid a few spots, but then syndication littered the playing field with hidden landmines. Won't someone clear the terrain of the Joe Rogan landmines?
The Glass is Too Big: My Take on Things
Wash was Joss Whedon's proxy in the cast. He looked like a young Joss Whedon, talked like him, had his attitude, and got all the funniest lines.
In short, that character was the author's voice.
Killing Wash established that "all bets are off." It was just about the last thing any fan of the show expected, and Whedon had to do something on that scale of unexpected tragedy to change the tone and make it clear that you weren't just watching a two-hour TV epdisode and paying eight bucks to do so.
It's also typical of Whedon's M.O. Everything you said so far throughout these threads sounds exactly like the complaints of thousands of angry lesbians which erupted when Tara (Willow's girlfriend) was shot in Season 7 of Buffy. "It wasn't needed" "the show will be weaker now" "it seemed meaningless to the story." Heck, do a global replace of "Wash" with "Tara" and throw in a little whining about how big media hates real lesbians, and your posts would fit right in to the whine-fests from back then.
News Flash: Whedon is not only willing to kill off well-loved characters, he's actually eager for the chance to do so. He's an evil god who never wants his creations to be happy. Bear that in mind when watching anything he makes.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
STOP SAYING THIS STUPID STUFF!!! YOU'RE DRIVING ME NUTS!!!
Killing Wash established that "all bets are off." It was just about the last thing any fan of the show expected...
It's also typical of Whedon's M.O.
Pick one please.
And finally: Whedon is not only willing to kill off well-loved characters, he's actually eager for the chance to do so. He's an evil god who never wants his creations to be happy. Bear that in mind when watching anything he makes.
This is what I mean when I talk about misery-loving Wheddonites. You can rest assured that I have NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in seeing anything else Wheddon has done.
But you get this through YOUR head - I can like Firefly without liking Wheddon. Just like I can like Star Wars (original and unedited) but still hate Lucas for what he did to the show - both in "improving" the originals and creating the prequals.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
Okay, but maybe in future you could hold off the sweeping statements? Because you keep saying things that are so clearly false and it's embarrasing. And then you're breaking out the CAPSLOCK OF RAGE, and all the "I've debated this at length on the boards" and it makes you kind of look like someone who really cares.
[nitpick]Except for the constant misspelling of Whedon's name[/nitpick]
I mean, somewhere downthread you're using the fact that there are no disabled characters in Firefly to springboard into a rant about (and nice use of Us and Them, there, btw) the othering of disabled people. Except one of the main storylines of the show, and the film, is led by River, a child tortured and left with a mental illness so debilitating she needs a permanent 24 hour carer. Clearly, your deep analysis missed the exploration of the dynamics between carer and cared-for: the guilt, the obligation, the blame, and the deep battlefield-esque bond that formed. You missed River's anguish over being powerless, and her searching for a purpose, to be useful and to be whole. Or maybe you just discounted all that.
Your keen eyes failed to read comments before you responded. You can't restrain yourself from having a go at "fandom", when you're clearly in it. You take jabs at "quantity over quality" when you're riding the teal deer to the Misty Point. You're going on like someone who found themselves in the minority on a fanboard and went a bit pompous and eyetwitchy over it. Just, just stop. You're hurting my face. :/
Killing Wash established that "all bets are off." It was just about the last thing any fan of the show expected...
It's also typical of Whedon's M.O.
Pick one please.
Whedon's M.O. is to move against audience expectaions. Therefore, those two sentences do not contradict.
This is what I mean when I talk about misery-loving Wheddonites. You can rest assured that I have NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in seeing anything else Wheddon has done.
Fair enough. You'll miss out on a lot of quality entertainment and witty dialog in the name of avoiding art which troubles and upsets you, but to each his own.
I can like Firefly without liking Wheddon. Just like I can like Star Wars (original and unedited) but still hate Lucas for what he did to the show - both in "improving" the originals and creating the prequals.
Firefly is just a story which Joss Whedon chose to tell us. Star Wars is just a story which George Lucas chose to tell us. Neither tale came about on their own, but were products of the imaginations of their writers. You can dislike other works by the same authors, but it's rather silly to try to create an artificial distinction between a story you liked and a storyteller you sometimes don't. The fact that you are so upset about them ruining the stories you followed is actually a pretty good indicator that you LOVED their work, with great passion. You simply can't pay a writer a higher compliment than to be utterly pissed off at a plot twist you didn't like in one of their stories. It's rock-solid proof that these writers managed to engage you on a deeply personal level, which is the ultimate goal of anybody who tells a story in any medium.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Well, in Serenity she is in the sunlight; also, having a vamipre or something supernatural(mystic) really doesn't fit in. :-)
;-)
.
Although, an "Inara" _is_ the Hindu goddess of rain and lightning and the Japanese god(dess) of rice/food
From what you have pointed out I would think more along the lines of genetic experiments/modifications(*).
Stuff like this is mentioned in the series (not only River), it could easily explain old-age-but-young-looking and could also tie in nicely with the "Blue Sun" storyline.
Also, maybe this isn't something special to Inara but that the companion training in general isn't only about candles, tea, pillows and seduction but also some genetic enhancements..
And I woudn't think that much about the (cross)bow with the rocket-powered bolts/arrows because it also fits that Inara uses weapons that are - compared to the guns of the crew - some more modern (although bow, it is an electronic enhanced bow) and stylish.
In fact, in the series (the scene you referenced at the end of "Trash") she also is the only one of the crew using a modern weapon (that little "ladylike" laser gun).
(*) Using that suicide kit will probably turn her into Ms. Hyde
You simply can't pay a writer a higher compliment than to be utterly pissed off at a plot twist you didn't like in one of their stories.
I disagree. What's a better indicator of the majesty of the Cistine Chapel - that it's beautiful from end to end or that (hypothetically speaking) Michalangelo painted a huge smiley face over one of the cherubs?
You'd probably get a much greater reaction from the former than from the latter. And in a sense you would be demonstrating the quality of the artists OTHER work. But again I think this is evidence of the superficiality of this thinking. Because no matter how shocking the smiley face would be I think the Cistine Chapel is better without the stark contrast that would imbue upon it.
The quality of art can not be judged, in my opinion, for the shock value it has. In my opinion shock value is cheap. You watch a movie that shocks and startles you - but does that mean it stays with you? The movies that I really, really love aren't ones that fail to shock me or that succeed in shocking me, they are movies that - years down the road - I can still find myself not only thinking about but also can still feel alive within me. I feel a better person for having seen them. I feel my life enriched by them. Like the Cistine Chapel they may not have a lot of "OMG he just got PWNED!!!!111oneone" moments in them - but they endure because the artist didn't screw up at point B just to show us how really awesome he was at points A and C.
I'm not saying you can't have a shocker that also enriches, but I AM saying that by overemphasizing the importance of shock, tension, etc (the visceral "at the moment" aspect of a movie) you run the risk of replacing long-term value with shock value.
That happens to be the mistake I think Whedon made.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
No, this is analogous to you screaming that the color of God's beard on the Cistine Chapel was a HUGE MISTAKE and therefore a big FUCK YOU from Michelangelo to the churchgoers.
Many of us really liked the movie, and Wash's death scene contributed to it being a movie which moved and impressed us. You obviously didn't. That doesn't make Joss Whedon some kind of antichrist for telling the story in a way you don't approve of.
I mean, Janeane Garafolo on prozac!!! If you take a minute to go back and re-read your posts, I think you'll be forced to admit that you're starting to sound like the Kathy Bates character in "Misery."
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Galactica 1980: the finding of Earth, aka "The Galactica Franchise just Jumped the Shark".
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I think it's even more disheartening as you describe it. If someone of his stature, coming off a wildly successful series has to accept such shitty terms, what hope is there for someone with no track record that's just starting out. I'm not saying the movie-tv-music production houses shouldn't be allowed to make these very lopsided contracts, I just wish someone would figure out a viable way to keep more creative control with the actual creators.
OK, there's a lot of confusion here about how the entertainment industry works. Here is my understanding of how Firefly/Serenity got where it is, bassed on the trades and my industry knowlege. Joss Whedon, or his production company Mutant Enemy had a first look deal with Fox (the Studio) to create television projects. This deal probably sprung up because of the success of Buffy. He did Buffy with Sanddollar (another production company) so I think that predates the deal with Fox. The first look deal means that he has to let them "buy" any show idea he comes up with. Also, he's probably obligated to pitch a certain number of ideas over the life of the contract. If they pass, and again there are all sorts of contractual limits on what that means, etc., then he can take it to other studios. In the case of Firefly they didn't. Now Fox the studio has the show in development. This is where the pilot script is conceved/written. The studio takes the idea/work in progress to various networks. Fox probably goes to Fox TV first for obvious reasons. If the people who decide what Fox puts on the air don't like it, don't feel they have a slot for it, whatever, then Fox the studio takes it to other networks. That is why Angel was a fox show but on the WB and why Buffy went from WB to UPN. When the network picks up the pilot, they make that episode. Lots of pilots get made and it's basically a proof of concept episode. It has to introduce the world/characters/etc and also be a solid indicator of what a typical episode will look like. Dozens of pilots all compete for a small number of open slots in the network's schedule. Now, over the life of this process, personel can change, politics can get involved, etc. In the case of Firefly the executive who ulitmately killed the show resided at the network. I don't know if they were the one who greenlit it, but I understand that they did have a profesional relationship with Joss in the past. Another thing to understand is that jobs in Hollywood are highly insecure. You don't want to be the one to make a decision unless you can prove to your boss in triplicate that it's the same play they would have made. I think that's why we saw the scheduling monkey business, etc.
Now on to the film. As you may have heard, the DVDs sold well. Real well. Money get's peoples attention, and from what I heard, the person who greenlit the film at Universal was also a fan. That never hurts. Universal isn't Fox. I've heard speculation online that there was a loophole in the contract allowing films. I don't know. It seems like something was worked out. From a who owns what standpoint, the film and the TV show are two entirely different properties. Fox isn't likely to ever relase television rights to anyone else because if it becomes successfull and you're the moron who sold it to them, you are out of a job. If it never makes a penny more, then no one was wrong. I don't make the rules.
At the end of the day, what I just said is mostly office gossip and rumors based on the way the industry tends to work (in my experience). Take it with as much salt as you want. Just realize that it is less likely to be a big conspiracy. As a footnote. Mutant Enemy ended its relationship with Fox a year early. They told Fox not to pay them the rest of the contract and closed up shop for at least the remainder of the contract. Joss apparently lost his taste for TV (perhaps because of what was done to Firefly?). Fox even went on record saying they would have happily continued to pay him even if he didn't pitch any new ideas.
Dude, I may be a persistant debater, but at this point I think only one of us is starting to sound crazy. In my circle of friends it's not uncommon to get worked up debating questions like whether sci fi is inherently better than fantasy or what some element of the movie Big Fish really meant.
So for me, as a passionate fan of Firefly, it's no biggie to state what it is that I think went wrong with Serenity and why.
But I'm totally cool with us disagreeing and even though I stand by my analysis for the most part (I don't have time to review everything and sometimes I make mistakes in my haste to post fast) I completely understand that you think Wash's death helped the movie out. That's cool, we disagree - life goes on.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
In general, I dislike sci-fi that says "this is utopian" and/or "this is despotic". Sci-fi, for me, is about projecting ahead. Extrapolating. (No wonder I liked that novel.) If I want to listen to worshipful praise, there are plenty of channels that specialize in that. As for demonizing, there's always CSPAN. If the far distant future is a rehash of a Nader speech, it might be a good thing nobody has perfected cryogenics.
Oh, I expect that the far distant future really will have elements of libertarian thought. It'll also have elements of socialist thought, communist thought, feudal thought, conservative thought, etc. Same as our politics of today have elements of the political systems of ancient Greece, ancient Rome and elements of the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent. We tend to build on what we have, which means not only will we still keep what we have (or how would we build on it?) but what we have will not keep still (we're a species of sub-creators, impermanence is the essence of our being, change is the only constant).
Few things are wholly wrong, even less is wholly right, black-and-white thinking is a greater source of evil than any specific system. Any system can be made to work, with sufficient effort. Rigid thinking and bipolar societies are incapable of long-term survival, no matter what the effort.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
That sounds considerably more reasonable than your earlier posts did. I also agree that only one of us was starting to sound crazy. Comparing the death of a character on a sci-fi show to defacing one of the greatest works of art in history... sorry dude, but that's nuts. I stand by my incredulity.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Sheesh - if you're going to read ridiculous things into metaphors all the time no wonder you're going to think everyone's crazy. Take a philosophy course sometime - they'll be talking about all sorts of ridiculous scenarios that could never happen because they help examine a point.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
I'm not the one who called Wash's death a "fuck you" to the fans. Be upset if you want, but have a little perspective, k?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I didn't say that either. Go read it again. I said it was "fuck you" to the fans who were existentialists. And, if Joss is a nihilist like you say he is, than I'm dead right.
I know that messageboard and flame wars aren't noted for their fine distinctions, but please read all of what I say. If you thought I said Whedon gave a big "fuck you" to the fans, that explains why you think I was going over board - but it's just not what I wrote.
-stormin
The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.