Why isn't Serenity isn't doing as well as ST? (spoilers) by Hartmeister

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Why isn't Serenity isn't doing as well as ST? (spoilers)

POSTED BY: HARTMEISTER
UPDATED: Thursday, October 20, 2005 10:06
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 718
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, October 20, 2005 10:06 AM

When I saw that Serenity was being released it kicked me into borrowing the Firefly DVD's from the library to see them. I was actually quite stunned. I had no idea the the series was as good as it was. Every episode was good (unlike the original ST). So I pressured my wife (didn't take much since she saw most of the series with me) and a couple of friends. I was actually a little embarrassed because I had shown them a few episodes from the borrowed DVDs but they were quite taken aback at the violence of the movie. While they said they thought it was good, it wasn't their cup of tea. These are the same type of people I would have dragged to any of the Star Trek movies and they would have like them and they did like the few Firefly episodes that I showed them. So I'm going to give my thoughts on why Serenity isn't doing as well as we thought.

1. Star Trek had more time to permeate the cultural consciousness - The long gap between the series and its first movie really allowed a large segment of the public to see ST. In addition syndication helped ST, since it was the only good (Lost in Space was not good) widely syndicated (Space 1999 was not commonly viewed) science-fiction show. It had been on long enough to have one of the greatest television parodies in the history of SNL performed on it. The fan base had time to really time to increase.

Firefly on the contrary has not had that period of time to percolate in the consciousness of society. Most people have not seen an episode of Firefly in contrast to the situation with ST.

You can also use this as a good analogy with the comic book movies. Most of the comic books are being revived because they have existed long enough in the culture that young and old have heard about them (if not have read them).

2. The Star Trek movies embraced the general theme, tone and characters of the series; The Serenity movie goes of slightly different from the series.

The Star Trek movies didn't show Kirk broken down the chain of command (at least right off) or showed. Spock dies in the second movie (and is given a great ending speech and a wonderful funeral) and is brought back in the third. The universe of the Federation is pretty much the same (but the characters look older).

In the Firefly universe, things have gotten worse. Mal is forced to use River on a job because it is hard for him to get work with everyone hunting River. Yes things alternated from good to worse in the series but not as bad as in the movie. Also two characters that are quite lovable are killed off in the movie with only a little send off at the end. I think if Chekhov had gotten killed by a phaser and the action just moved on, ST fans would have mighty angry.

3. Star Trek was sci-fi/military series about exploration and adventure (and a little humor); Firefly was a western/sci-fi about an outlaw gang hybrid that generally had as much or more humor than ST.

ST movies actually contained more humor and and about the same amount of action (though STNG movies contain much more action than usually occur than the series). Exploration seems to get slightly the shift in the movies but the adventure is still there.

However, the big shift in "Serenity" is that there is little humor or that is so quick that the audience is given little time to enjoy it. The people seem generally tired of being on the ship. This is probably a very logical plot development of the series. It makes for a bad movie, though. I realized I smiled very little during the movie though I smiled often in the series. What would we think of "Maverick" if there had been no humor in it. I really think that the big innovation of Firefly was what it was a truly a western in space. The inspired casting was Nathan Fillion as Captain Mal. He gave what could have been a depressing character, a humorous nature. The Mal of Serenity seems a more serious and less enjoyable character.

3. All Star Trek's acknowledged their past by having Star Trek as the beginning title; Serenity chooses to use the name of the ship (less well known).

While Firefly is not as well known as Star Trek, causal TV viewers probably heard promos for it. For some reason it was chosen not call the movie "Firefly the Movie" or "Firefly: Serenity". This could have built up people to purchase the DVDs in advance of the movie or catch a few episodes on the tube in advance of the movie. Instead there is this movie called Serenity with virtually no recognizable actors and it is hard to understand what the movie is about in the trailers.

4. The Trailer, promo etc

I want everybody to understand that what this movie needed was a really strong promotional campaign that started a year ago in the theatres around the Firefly DVDs and the upcoming movie. It needed to build in the casual sci-fi viewer to rent/buy the series so they could participate in the movie. I give the analogy of the "The Lion Witch and the Wardrobe" and "The Lord of the Rings" as promotional campaigns. There were also early promos of the first Star Trek movie out with very little visuals which tried to build anticipation. I think such such an approach would have helped with with Firefly, if it had been a general audience film instead of one built for some of the fan base.

Instead much of the promo seems be from the fans, Josh and the cast. I saw the first trailer for this some while back and I had no idea what it was about. I did not even make the connection between it and the Firefly series which I remembered from an interview Josh give on a NPR talk show.

5. Why emphasize resolving the plot lines when you could just emphasize good, clean fun?

This movie seems to be about resolving various plot lines in the series (River's fate, Zoe & Walsh, Simon & Kaylee, would Inara get back on the ship and the mystery of Book (Book's death in a way ends the mystery because with him dead are we that interested in him any more)) for the fans and to give action to the casual action viewer. The problem about the former is there are not enough of them and the problem with the latter is they are so jaded it requires too much action to interest them.

Instead just concentrate on resolving a single plot question (Book's past would have been a good idea) and just make a long heist part of the plot. The most entertaining episodes (I'm not talking about plot development) Or moreover ripoff any of the good plots of dozens of Westerns and meld Firefly into it. Westerns are rare nowadays in comparison to sci-fi. Emphasize which was unique about Firefly. One of the most unique parts of any episode was the beginning bar fight scene in "The Train Job" when Mal is thrown through a holographic window and then the Serenity comes up from cliff side when they are cornered. A scene like that in a trailer would have been priceless as a introduction to the world of Firefly. A good funny, sci-fi western adventure movie going into the Halloween slasher season would have done good.

Anyhow I've got to go pick up my kids from school so I just thought you might want the impressions of a new fan of Firefly on the movie.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE