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."

10 of 641 comments (clear)

  1. Re:No rights for it by Psykechan · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  2. Very misleading by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  3. Uh, yeah, bit misleading by seasleepy · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  4. Re:No rights for it - Translation by schon · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  5. Re:Just a thought.... by Orne · · Score: 4, Informative

    Other than Joss not having the rights to the show (as mentioned above), I had heard that the episodes were on the order of a $1 mil / each to film and release.

    Double-checking, I'm wrong, it's $2 million per episode in production costs for Firefly... That's almost as much as ABC's Lost, and there they have a huge audience and marketing engine behind the show. They only got $38 mil total for the Serenity movie, about $ 3/4 mil short of the public production costs.

    In my humble opinion, Joss should be seeking to release an adult-level animated series, similar to WB's Batman, or even an anime-style futuristic romp. The level of detail, varied scenery, and scale of the sets are just too big for production offices these days, and if you can't film it, you can certainly draw it.

  6. Sci Fi channel is owned by NBC by hpulley · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sci Fi is not owned by Fox, it is owned by NBC.

    --
    $#!^ happens, but why does it always have to happen to me???
  7. Re:I'm a little shocked... by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...that the movie only made $25m, and that marketing is being blamed.

    Actually the movie has grossed 38 million, one million short of the budget. Heres the industry rule of thumb. Box office is 1/5 of the total income from a movie, once you include DVD sales, and showings on television. Production budget is 1/3 of the cost of the movie once you figure in marketing and distribution costs. So the movie cost 117 million and will make about 190 million when all is said and done. Rumor has it they skimped a lot on the marketing, so it will actually be quite a bit more profitable than that. Also, Serenity is the number one DVD sale on Amazon today, so DVD sales may be a lot more than expected. Anyone who thinks it was a "flop" does not know what they are talking about. Not that it was a huge success, as movies go.

  8. Re:'Firefly' not said in Serenity by MaggieL · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you listen carefully, you'll notice that the word 'Firefly' isn't said at all in the film.

    "Ensign: We got a pos on a retinal--man carrying her out is Malcolm Reynolds, captains a Firefly-class transport ship 'Serenity'. Bound by law five times..."

    It's in the script. I'll check my DVD when it gets here this week.

    --
    -=Maggie Leber=-
  9. Joss Whedon's comment on this article - MOD UP! by Kazzahdrane · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  10. False by ThePepe · · Score: 5, Informative

    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).