Firefly a ripoff of Andromeda? by Swatter

Quote:
Originally posted by Haken:
Yeah, and the operative word here is "Archetype."

You can pretty much break any character in a sci-fi series down to basic archetypes, which explains why you see the same characters over and over.

What I've noticed that's interesting is that the archetypes for sci-fi characters are *very* similar to the archetypes of Westerns. Maybe it relates to the fact that Star Trek, one of the pioneering (no pun intended) sci-fi shows, was originally titled "Wagon-Train to the Stars."

I just think that's interesting.

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 10:44 AM

None. Like I said, I just read the charater description and they seem more than similar.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 10:46 AM

You're right.
Farscape charaters are like those on Andromeda.

Lol...okay, Harper needs to eat more. ;)

Only Andromeda was written first by Gene Rodenberry.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 10:48 AM

You're proabbly right. Which saddens me. I was hoping for something original, not another copy.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 10:51 AM

I have confidence that Joss can write..I just wished the show had a better cast. I love Torres but the rest...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 2:13 PM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.

Quote:
Originally posted by Swatter:
Only Andromeda was written first by Gene Rodenberry.

The Andromeda you see today with its various characters like Beka, Tyr, Trance, etc. is purely a creation of Robert Hewitt Wolfe, which came after Farscape.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 1, 2002 3:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Swatter:
I have confidence that Joss can write..I just wished the show had a better cast. I love Torres but the rest...

Have you even seen the rest of them in a role with any integrity? Well, I for one have see Alan Tudyk (Wash) in a play in New York and he was *amazing*, and he was great in 28 Days as well.

Nathan Fillion has won a daytime emmy, and I liked him in "Two Guys and a Girl."

Jewel Staite... well... she really hasn't been in anything where I've enjoyed her character, so I'm taking a risk with her.

The guy that plays Simon was good in the remake of Brian's Song... but I can't say the same for the entire production. (why remake a classic?)

I'm just wondering how you can make a judgement yet? I don't like that at all.

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

"Blood just kept pouring out of them, you'd slip in it half the time, find out bloodbath is not just a figure of speech."
-Zoe; Firefly, "Serenity" Shooting Script.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 2, 2002 10:16 AM

Did that play win any awards? Did his performance wow the reviewers? No? How shocking!

Nathan Fillion is probably the worst of the bunch. I saw his pitful performance in Two guys, girl and a piazza place. Lol..even Susan Lucci won that award! That's such a pity award. They give that award out as a prize whe you get in the door.

The Original Brian's Song was so much better. Simon was passble and that was considered his best performance.

Like I said. Gina Torres. She the "it" girl on the show.

I'm banking on her to carry the show for an eppy or two. Then it will be a quick slide to tv oblivion.

I'm making my judgements on their performances and casting choices. I've seen the original script and it stunk. They say the second one's supposed to be better but I doubt it very much.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 2, 2002 10:17 AM

So, Joss should pay the Farscape people? Good idea. They can do with some more money for FX. Love the show.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 2, 2002 11:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Swatter:
Did that play win any awards? Did his performance wow the reviewers? No? How shocking!

Actually... reviewers were very impressed with him...

Epic Proportions Review: http://www.curtainup.com/epicproportions.html

Wonder of the World review: This is not so much a play as a scrapbook of funny snapshots, but there is sprightly staging by Christopher Ashley, and a canny cast that also includes Bill Raymond, Kevin Chamberlin, Amy Sedaris, the delectable Alan Tudyk, and the incomparable Marylouise Burke
http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5355

Hearts in Atlantis review: A special mention has to go out to Alan Tudyk (the redheaded friend from 'A Knight's Tale'). His small scene is one of the best, and it's great to see this guy getting more roles. http://www.chud.com/reviews/hearts.php3

(I'll add more as I find it...)

He did indeed win an award... he received the Clarence Derwent and Drama League Award for best New York debut in 1997.

If he hadn't recieved any critical praise, it doesn't really mean anything. i know several people, one of whom can easilly be contacted on the animeondvd.com forums, that have followed Alan Tudyk's stage career with intense fervor. So, even if the critics didn't find something to like (which they did, as proven above) the audience did, as there are many loyal Alan Tudyk fans out there.

Quote:

Nathan Fillion is probably the worst of the bunch. I saw his pitful performance in Two guys, girl and a piazza place. Lol..even Susan Lucci won that award! That's such a pity award. They give that award out as a prize whe you get in the door.

So, Susan Lucci won the "Best Younger Male Lead" at the Daytime Emmys? Man... she *is* a versatile actress.

Quote:

The Original Brian's Song was so much better. Simon was passble and that was considered his best performance.

See also: first recognized performance

Quote:
Like I said. Gina Torres. She the "it" girl on the show.

I'm banking on her to carry the show for an eppy or two. Then it will be a quick slide to tv oblivion.

Well... through all of your errors in syntax... I take it you like Gina Torres? Watch the show for her, if you like her so much.

Quote:
I'm making my judgements on their performances

right... I can trust the irrationality of your previous posts to show your taste in acting... which I simply disagree with.

Quote:
and casting choices.

well... umm... for lack of a better word... duh?

Quote:
I've seen the original script and it stunk.

right... And James Cameron is my uncle

Quote:
They say the second one's supposed to be better but I doubt it very much.

Why do you doubt it?

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

"Blood just kept pouring out of them, you'd slip in it half the time, find out bloodbath is not just a figure of speech."
-Zoe; Firefly, "Serenity" Shooting Script.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 2, 2002 8:33 PM

There is a distinct difference between Andromeda and Firefly. The premise of Andromeda is that Dylan Hunt is trying to reunite the planets. On Firefly, Mal fought *against* unification, a war that has already been lost. Resistance now a lost cause, he and his crew roam the periphery of this new "Alliance." So the premise of Firefly is closer to Farscape, but not really...

--- Joe

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 3, 2002 1:45 AM

KAMLEY

Another big difference that Firefly has from Andromeda and Farscape is that neither Dylan Hunt or John Crighton were involved with the circumstances that led to the dark age that their shows are in. Dylan was frozen in time before he started working a crew of money-grubbers-suddenly-turned-moral and Crighton is the fish-out-of-water on the show that was helping the escaped prisoners -after they had already escaped- until he could figure out how to get home and not get killed.

(yes, I know there's more to the shows than that, but I'm speaking in terms of the "gist" set up in the beginning)

Mal was fighting the horrible fight the whole time, witnessing horrible acts (I'm basing this on Zoe's speech in the script) while the side of the war he was fighting for lost horribly. He already knows some characters on the show before the first episode and has at least one really well developed relationship with Zoe if not with another character too.

And since this is supposively going to be a character/emotion driven series, this little difference means the word of difference.

-Kamley

A lifetime of things to say, all rushing to be said at the same time doesn't bode well for my voice.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 3, 2002 12:36 PM

Lol...is that the site? Sorry, but I thought you had a review from the NY times or something real. Not some cheap site from someone in Flushing NY put up in their spare time.

Gina is the only reason I'd watch the new pilot.

I doubt it cause the Advertisers weren't even impressed with the new Firefly rewrite. I can have a small..small...small...glimmer of hope that it will somehow be good but I don't want to be dissapointed by another Enterprise. Check out Hollywood reporter or Varitey.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 3, 2002 11:53 PM

CHARLIEBLUE

Quote:
Originally posted by Swatter:
I doubt it cause the Advertisers weren't even impressed with the new Firefly rewrite.

Who are you? Do you sit around the Fox offices all day or something? I mean, you've seen the script (and actually read it carefully enough to make a judgement), you apparently know all of the actors' abilities (despite most of them being relative unknowns--one is a ballerina!), and now it looks like you can read the advertising execs' minds. That's just uncanny.

And is this wacky power the reason your opinion is more valid than the critic in Flushing?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 4, 2002 7:45 AM

Hey! There are other things around the Fox offices than just sitting. There's uuummm....
drinking coffee, watching tv, making phone calls...uummm...well...there's other
stuff.

You're right I can't be critical of a ballerina. Who can hate a ballerina? Now, a Mime is different! I hate Mime's.

I don't have to read the Ad execs minds. Go to variety.com and type in Firefly and read the upfront article. By the way Upfront refers to advertisers purchasing blocks of ad time way before shows air. Don't worry..Firefly fared better than Fast Lane. At least Firefly didn't get laughed at.

Lol..did I say more opinion means anything? These are just my whacky opinions. Psstt.. thanks for noticing I'm whacky. :)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 4, 2002 8:22 AM

SHUGGIE

I tried variety.com but you need a subscription to read the articles.

Shug

Her lips were saying 'No' but then I looked into her eyes
... and her eyes were saying 'read my lips'
- Niles Crane

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 4, 2002 9:12 AM

Yeah, I think it unfair to judge unknowns. I'm sure Swatter can recall that when BtVS premeired, NOBODY knew who those people were...

Nic Brendon -- bit parts in Dave's World, Married W/ Children.
Aly Hannigan -- don't recall off hand, but American Pie is 3 yrs away.
ASH -- if anyone knew him at all, it was from the Taster's Choice ads.
Charisma Carpenter -- bit parts in a couple of T&A shows, San Diego Charger Girl.
David Boreanaz -- no prior experience so far as I know; hired because he looked pretty.
SMG -- The only one with any kind of exposure with Emmy-winning role on All My Children. Also on a terrible show called Swan's Crossing.

--- Joe

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 4, 2002 9:32 AM

And Buffy is a rip-off of TNG. After all, they both have robots that aren't very bright!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 5, 2002 2:56 AM

TIEKA

Quote:
Originally posted by Swatter:
I just saw a post on this board about Rev Bem from Andromeda and a charater on Firefly. OMG! I just noticed that most of the charaters are the same! Sorry, but I'm just a big fan of that show. I'm not sure if many people are gonna watch it now if it's just a clone of Andromeda. I expected more of Joss...

I guess you would say that Voyager was just a clone of ST:TNG and DS9. Of course they were clones of ST:TOS, which was a clone of Wagon Train, which was a clone of Jason and the Argonauts, which was a clone of .... and so on.

Just because something is similar doesn't make it a clone. The similarity makes it easier to understand the show, while the writers add in some other bits to make it different. I liked ST:TOS and since TNG was a clone, I watched it as well. Does that make TNG bad? No, it just means there was a common starting point. Where it went after that was what made the show unigue. I am expecting the same with Firefly. It is similiar to a dozen shows so I have something familar to start with and then the show will take me for a ride from there.

Tieka,
sharing a

with Swatter

Beware of programmers who carry screwdrivers.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 5, 2002 9:53 AM

Quote:
...I have something familar to start with and then the show will take me for a ride from there...

Exactly.

But on your first point first: what could reasonably be the newest form of fiction but science fiction, right? But it's been around at least as long as Greek myths talking about Daedalus and Icarus flying, or Hephaestus making robots on Mt. Olympos or the big bronze robot Talos guarding an island - 2500 years ago. Nothing, descriptively, categorically, is new - it's the details and nuances and significance you invest it with that make it fresh. And, even then, how new and original is love or hate; pain or pleasure? Certain things, to be significant, are also constant.

Now on the second thing - this is one of Joss' many strengths - there's your run of the mill genre horror flick and then there's your run of the mill parody of genre horror flicks. Joss, in Buffy and Angel, doesn't do either of these, but he uses the genre conventions to have things to twist off of and surprise you - and he consciously flirts with disaster. Buffy has done nearly everything in the book out of foresight and planning that other shows do out of exhausted creativity and clumsiness. He's killed the main character, invented characters out of thin air, done a musical for crying out loud, and they all triumph brilliantly because he knows what he's doing and knows how to take genre conventions and cliches and make them new and make them work for him.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, June 7, 2002 5:09 AM

ANNE

First, I have to admit that I was struck by a few similarities with Andromeda when I read the info about the show on the OS. I was also struck by some significant differences.

I think Firefly will be very different from Andromeda or any other show on television right now. And although I'm not a Buffy viewer, fans have convinced me that JW has the talent to make the show something special.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 12:38 PM

ORACLE

When I first heard the basic premise of the show I was worried that it sounded a little too much like several other sci-fi shows that are already on TV, but I just reminded myself that Joss is the genius behind this show and he has always suprised me and doesn't tend to go the ordinary or common route. So I have faith in Joss and will wait to watch before I make any conclusions about it.

For long you live and high you fly
and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry
and all that you touch and all that you see
is all your life will ever be.
Pink Floyd

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 2:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by J:
Now on the second thing - this is one of Joss' many strengths - there's your run of the mill genre horror flick and then there's your run of the mill parody of genre horror flicks. Joss, in Buffy and Angel, doesn't do either of these, but he uses the genre conventions to have things to twist off of and surprise you - and he consciously flirts with disaster.

You make it sound like he has a death wish. Better to say he takes risks. Which is something you have to do if you're going to create anything at all original.

And something that the media monopolies are less and less willing to allow. TV shows like Buffy, that lack an obvious audience, have a hard time getting on the air. Whedon lucked out on two fronts: he had friends in Fox Studios that trusted his creative impulses. And he started working on Buffy just when the WB was most desperate to find programming that people would actually watch.

I think it was their second season on the air. Their first consisted of what was probably the worst lineup of sex-oriented sitcoms in TV history. Lots of people expected them to disappear. Without Buffy, they probably would have.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 2:28 PM

So... I just watched my first episode of Andromeda ever... and I hated it. Sorry all you Andro fans, but I *hated* it. I tuned in to watch James Marsters, but nope... even he couldn't save it for me.

I now know that Firefly better not be anything like Andromeda... or I will kill someone.

I doubt it will be anything like Firefly, though... Joss is a good writer, and, well... Andromeda's writer for this episode was god-awful. (sorry if you liked it... that's not to reflect anything more than my own opinion!)

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

... I guess it's a Joss thing...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 2:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
So... I just watched my first episode of Andromeda ever... and I hated it. Sorry all you Andro fans, but I *hated* it. I tuned in to watch James Marsters, but nope... even he couldn't save it for me.

I've only caught a few episodes. Could never get into it, mainly because of the acting. But I'm told the stories were a lot better when they started out. Fell victim to the usual push for More Action.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 6:17 PM

PANDORA

Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
So... I just watched my first episode of Andromeda ever... and I hated it. Sorry all you Andro fans, but I *hated* it. I tuned in to watch James Marsters, but nope... even he couldn't save it for me.

I now know that Firefly better not be anything like Andromeda... or I will kill someone.

I doubt it will be anything like Firefly, though... Joss is a good writer, and, well... Andromeda's writer for this episode was god-awful. (sorry if you liked it... that's not to reflect anything more than my own opinion!)

Oh, Nova, Nova, Nova...

Now you went and done did it.

You did done gone and opened a big ol' can o' worms.

Let's see if I can break it down into the short version.

Gene Roddenberry, Father of All Things Trek(tm), had a few liner notes and stuff written on napkins (practically) referring to a space drama about a scientist who gets frozen in time for 300 years and wakes up to try and make the wrong things right. He also has something written on another napkin about a ship made flesh who's also a hot chick. There's also some other stuff about a show where people are trying to reform a space alliance.

From this, Robert Hewitt Wolfe, a man I consider to be a very talented sci fi television writer, created Andromeda.

The Andromeda universe started as an extensive one, incorporating a lot of interesting ideas about philosophy, spirituality, politics and the like. It maintained the Roddenberry optimism, but took on a darker filter for it.

Wolfe was fond of story arcs and in depth characterization. The characters were, for the most part, multilayered, and some were freakin' fascinating. Unfortunately, the nimrod cast as the lead in this series (Kevin Sorbo), could not keep up with the complex plots and layered characters (yes, there were some protagonists in the ensemble who were manipulative and *gasp* weren't necessarily what they appeared to be). Just before the second season, El Nimrodo Grande became Executive Producer (although he may not have yet been credited) and he, in conjunction with the network (who couldn't seem to wait to screw with a good thing) almost immediately begain putting pressure on Wolfe, who was the Head Writer, to basically dumb the show down.

Reflections of this can begin to be seen toward the middle of the second season; where this might have been where Andromeda really started to pick up steam and get really good (as happened to Buffy, for example). About halfway (perhaps a little before) through the season Wolfe was fired, and the story arcs began to be tied up. Characters were changed to be more simple and straightforward (read: cartoonish), and the show quickly devolved into the Kevin Sorbo Action Hour.

I was a really big fan of Andromeda. I saw a great deal of potential in it. It's unfortunate that that potential will never be realized, and that Kevin Sorbo gets to make any decisions that don't involve what he'll be eating for breakfast each morning.

As far as what happened to Andromeda happening to Firefly, or Firefly even resembling Andromeda, it's highly unlikely. Joss is the star in this scenario, not some buffed up dillweed with the IQ of a pencil sharpener. That being the case, Firefly should be more than fine.

Pandora
apologies to any Sorbo fans out there. Kind of.

"Logic is a wonderful thing, but it doesn't beat actual thought." -Terry Pratchett, the Last Continent

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 6:35 PM

ok... I understand where you're coming from, but that does not effect the fact that the episode I watched was utter crap.

If the show had matured naturally with the original writer/story designer, I imagine it would have been a decent, if not great, show. That still doesn't effect the fact that what the networks now call Andromeda (being a bastard retardation of its original concept) is a terrible show at this point in its development. It is currently poorly acted, poorly directed, atrociously written, and has a hillariously shallow budget (I do like the way the actual Andromeda looks, though).

Maybe I'd be singing a different song if I had seen a season one episode or half of season two's episodes... but as it is, I really hate the show.

And I totally agree with your assessment of Kevin Sorbo... god... if there were a more moronic actor on the planet, you'd be hard pressed to find one.

So, Pandora... I may have liked it originally, had I seen it the way it was intended, but now it is a shoot-em-up sci-fi show for 10 year olds.

I feel for your disappointment... a very similar thing happened to Roswell, which was *very* good seasons 1 and 2, but degraded into a terrible shell of itself after that. It sounds like I would have liked it had it not been for the insipid mass of a "man" called Kevin Sorbo.

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

... I guess it's a Joss thing...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 7:21 PM

JONWES

Yeah, Andro started out somewhat interesting. They kind of had me at the end of season 1/beginning of 2. But they've basically removed every interesting aspect of the show.

It's pretty painful to watch, and yes the episode Marsters was in was pretty awful. It really is sad. Sort of like what happened with Earth Final Conflict. The first season was great. But then it just totally devolved in the second season on till by the end of the show there was really only one original cast member left. I didn't even watch this final season. Most people didn't even realize it had it's season finale. I planned to watch it but it passed me by.

With Roswell, I really liked the first season. The second season was OKAY, but not the best and the third season wasn't so much bad as meandering and boring.

Even if Firefly isn't a Buffy size hit, I hope it's a Felicity size one (That's was a damn good show) and runs for a good 4-5 years.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 7:39 PM

Quote:
Even if Firefly isn't a Buffy size hit, I hope it's a Felicity size one (That's was a damn good show) and runs for a good 4-5 years.

Yeah...I think Firefly is virtually guaranteed much of the loyal ME fanbase, plus network viewers. I think it'll draw as many, if not more, viewers than DA.

--- Joe

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 8:19 PM

SHAMUS

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
I think it'll draw as many, if not more, viewers than DA.

A little research on the web reveals that DA's ratings on Fridays averaged 4.0/7 (about 4 million viewers, 7% of homes).

Fox knows, historically, that time slot can pull a 9/10 (xfiles).

So, now we know how to compare. Not that I give a rusty hoot about ratings. More often that not, they just prove that the majority of people who watch TV are brain-dead.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, June 8, 2002 8:22 PM

Quote:
Not that I give a rusty hoot about ratings. More often that not, they just prove that the majority of people who watch TV are brain-dead.

Totally agree.

--- Joe

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 9, 2002 4:49 AM

ANNE

Andromeda started decently and really seemed to be going somewhere. There were a couple of episodes in the first season that were excellent, almost brilliant, good omens for the future as the writers and directors learned what they could do with this new concept.

But that feeling is pretty much gone. I wasn't that crazy about most of the S2 eps and in fact had quit watching the show toward the end of S2.

A decision made by TPTB created the change in the show's direction. I think it's absurd to believe that one person, Kevin Sorbo, has so much power that he could dictate major changes without the input or cooperation of the rest of the management staff. Television just doesn't work that way.

Having said that, let me add that I'm far from a fan of Sorbo's, but that has more to do with what I perceive as his lack of actual acting talent than anything else.

Let's just hope Firefly is allow to develop naturally.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 9, 2002 5:08 AM

PANDORA

Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:

Yeah...I think Firefly is virtually guaranteed much of the loyal ME fanbase, plus network viewers. I think it'll draw as many, if not more, viewers than DA.

--- Joe

I wholeheartedly agree.

I gave DA a fair shot, and watched a number of episodes when it first started airing, and it just *lacked* something. The concept was interesting, and they had quite a budget, but overall, there was something missing- and I think many people felt similarly.

Firefly, on the other hand (and granted, these are assumptions based on impressions, sight unseen), is being written by someone who's already proven that he's capable of reaching across genre lines with quality writing to make a show a success.

Nonetheless, I wish those idiots at Fox would invest even a fraction of good faith (i.e., a better time slot) in Firefly as they do in say, Bachelorettes in Alaska.

Buttheads.

Pandora

"Logic is a wonderful thing, but it doesn't beat actual thought." -Terry Pratchett, the Last Continent

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 9, 2002 7:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Pandora:

Nonetheless, I wish those idiots at Fox would invest even a fraction of good faith (i.e., a better time slot) in Firefly as they do in say, Bachelorettes in Alaska.

Buttheads.

Well, network suits are buttheads, that's a given. But it's a lot cheaper to put a bunch of bimobs and a camera crew on a plane to Alaska, than it is to hire writers, actors, crew, CGI bozoes, etc., for a SF show.

Anyway, if you're worried about Fox promoting Firefly, don't. I promise you, you'll see promos every ten minutes on Fox, FX, and SciFi, starting two months before the premiere. But not before then. That would be excessive!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 9, 2002 8:48 AM