Quote:

---

October 13, 2005

Is this what passes for science fiction?
By Jackie Harvey
Posted at 12:01 AM

I went to see the Reese Witherspoon movie I was talking about last time, but I tore my pants on my doorframe on the way out. By the time I had changed pants, I would have missed the previews, so I decided to play Jackie's Movie Roulette and see whatever movie was playing next when I got to the theater. Sometimes it's a bust, but sometimes, you're pleasantly surprised and you get a Something About Polly. That movie made me want to buy a ferret for months.

This time, I wasn't so lucky. I went to see a movie that, like Dukes of Hazard was based on a TV show. The movie was called Serenity. Now, I've never seen the original Serenity series. In fact, I had never heard of it, and I write about this stuff, for the love of Pete. It was a space series, which I usually like, but there was something that bothered me about it.

After about an hour into it, I figured it out. There were no space aliens! Why make it a space movie if you're not going to have any aliens in it? Why not just make it an earth movie? We've all seen aliens in movies before. We know they exist. So why not show them? I guess the cast was really good, but they would have really been better if they had a space alien to play off of. (two stars)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SoulOfSerenity:
Does anyone else see a problem with this line of thinking?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GWEK:
Um... You guys DO understand that this is "The Onion", right? If you're taking this seriously, go read a few other stories on the site.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InsanityLater:
So.. all space movies must have a token alien in it to be good. That's what Serenity needed to be a number 1 blockbuster!!! Jar Jar Binks running around screaming "MEESA GONNA DIE" during the opening landing sequence. I guess it's safe to say this guy just don't get it.

---

Select to view spoiler:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Saffy:
The whole joke behind Jackie Harvey (a fictional personality whose column used to be more appropriately named "On the Outside") is that he is a COMPLETELY UNQUALIFIED entertainment journalist. He misunderstands everything in Hollywood, draws hilariously naive conclusions, gets stars' names wrong, confuses Ingmar Bergman with Ingrid Bergman, etc,

Because irony is the point, I'm willing to bet whoever wrote this column is actually a "Serenity" fan. If they'd hated the film, "Jackie Harvey" would have written it up as a sci-fi masterpiece, underscoring his cluelessness.

The Onion's brand of satire is so deadpan that some folks don't realize it's a joke at first. They once had a headlining article about how Congress was threatening to strike unless they got a swanky new capitol building. A newspaper in China picked it up and ran the story--to their mortification.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Vancouver:

Quote:

---

Absolutely, this is Onion's version of a rave review. What their perenially inept reviewer is choosing to complain about is the subtlety and intelligence of the movie, the lack of trite, predictable elements. You guys, speaking as someone who has all the Onion annual compilations, I can tell you that you need to read this like it's in Oppositeland. Two stars is good. A bad review is good. This fictional reviewer is someone you DON'T want liking your movie, believe me! If he likes it, you're doomed!
Vancouver

---

Hmmm.. So he's Bizarro Ebert! That would explain alot.. like why his review sounds like it belongs on "The Daily Show"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Serenity NOW!!! ... Insanity later."

Quote:

---

Originally posted by yorg:
That would be awsome if you think about it.

If Joss added a wannabe jar jar type alien charater, and Mal just shot it the head 30 seconds into the movie. That would be gold.

---