My thoughts on Serenity *SPOILER* by j6ngo1977

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

My thoughts on Serenity *SPOILER*

POSTED BY: J6NGO1977
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 28, 2005 18:26
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7226
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, December 25, 2005 3:20 PM

J6NGO1977

OK I watched Serenity tonight for the first time. Good christmas present :). First off I'll say I really love it. I watched it as an objective Browncoat. I'll point out what made me love the film and also what made me be a bit negative.

The characters have not changed from Firefly which was the biggest worry I had. The characters have transposed to the big screen very well, as Kaylee would say, 'they are just filmed in a fancier way'. Joss has also done a very clever thing by using good dialogue snippets that had been used in previous Firefly episodes. I don't see that as cheating I see that as a good way of talking to both the Browncoats and the None Browncoats.

I love the SFX. Very gritty and very real looking. In King Kong I may think 'Yeh but King Kong looks CGI' but in Serenity that thought never trespassed over my shiny mind.

The Story was good. From a none Browncoat point of view it is drama, comedy, action and tears all the way. However for a Browncoat it can be a bit ropey. Firstly is that Serenity that hauls Simon and River from the Alliance test facility? If so? how can that cannot be?????

Sheperd is not part of the crew. I can understand why they did that. However Sheperd is then killed off. I think most Browncoats are not happy about this. However it suits the none Browncoats to feed Mals anger against the Reavers.

Wash was killed. Ok that was the biggest no, no. Wash getting killed was done for movie shock value. 'The lovable, funny guy making a joke and then gets impaled' it's text book. I love Wash, like many do. So that saddened me.

For River I felt alot more empathy for. She seemed to be a bit more in touch with the crew than in Firefly and sometimes I just wanted to hug her and protect her like Simon does. As for River showing her true ability....what a treat :) It's like Joss Whedon said to his Fight choreographers 'Ok I want this to be like Buffy fighting but on steroids'. Summer Glau pulled of not just a great acting performance but also great fight sequences.

Last but not least. The end dialogue Mal makes to River in the cockpit absolutely tore me up. Yes a grown man with tears rolling down his cheeks. That was me :). I can see why that would effect myself and other Browncoats so much, but its such a good scene for most people not to be choked about.

Well there you go. As a Firefly fan I would score this as an 8.0 The reason why? is plainly, if I was on a desert Island and all I had was a DVD player (ok unlikely but imagine a waterproof, samsinite case with DVD player etc) and a choice between 1 Firefly episode and Serenity I would pick 'Out of Gas' every time.

If I had never watched Firefly in my life I would give Serenity 9.0. great story, great action, great acting. Nice job Mr Whedon.

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 3:38 PM

CHRISISALL

Nice review j6ngo.
I give it a 10, though, for the turnaround Mal went through- finding 'himself' again.
My only real complaint is the lack of Greg Edmonson's lovely tunes, that would have made the gold twice as shiny.

P.S., that was a 'faction' shuttle hired by Simon :)

Chrisisall serene

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 3:51 PM

J6NGO1977

Ohhhhh thanks Chris. I knew Joss, or hoped, Joss wouldnt do something stupid like having Firefly pick them up. OK I'll up my Browncoat score to 8.5 :D

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 3:57 PM

THOLO

After the River slaughter of the Reavers, how does she open the door???

The only thing I can figure is that she kicks a Reaver head to hit the door button. Why will it still open Kaylee fixed it not to open from the outside. OK River is smarter then Kaylee, but that would have to be pretty quick to stand in front of the door at the end.

Now this does not ruin the movie for me but I am sure none BC's will ask and I need to give a good answer.

Help

Keep Flying!

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:07 PM

J6NGO1977

River is past opening doors. You are getting too mechanical. Doors have no meaning to River. C'mon you are here , on a firefly fan site, you must know how powerful River is?

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:22 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Sheperd is not part of the crew. I can understand why they did that. However Sheperd is then killed off. I think most Browncoats are not happy about this. However it suits the none Browncoats to feed Mals anger against the Reavers.

Close, but not quite. It wasn't the Reavers who did Shepherd Book in on Haven, it was the Alliance (on orders from The Operative). Hence, his death was necessary to inflame Mal's anger against the Alliance into a hard, forged spear of fury. And to make Mal "believe" in something, as the Shepherd had so succinctly pointed out to Mal in their prior meeting.

As for Book not being part of the crew, that was answered as well. He says (as he lay dying) that Mal can't give him orders anymore; he's not one of the crew. Mal corrects him, telling him he IS part of Serenity's crew. Like they say, once you've been in Serenity...

I know a lot of people have been (and still are) upset by two of the deaths in the movie. Usually, they'll forgive Joss the one (Book's) death, allowing as it *might* be needed to drive the story forward - as well as to show just what lengths The Operative and the Alliance are willing to go to in order to retrieve their weaponized little girl and protect their secrets. The biggest problem the true Browncoats seem to have with Serenity is Wash's death, and that it seemed utterly unnecessary to so many viewers. All I can say is this: If you watched Joss's earlier works, you know that death can come for anyone, at any time, and there is no such thing as an "unnecessary death" in his storylines. Tara's death in Buffy was a huge shock to most (myself included, and I didn't even like her that much!), as was Jenny Calendar's. There were shocking deaths in Angel as well, so it wasn't out of the question for one or two of our BDH's to shuffle off this mortal coil for (seemingly) no good reason.

I say we give Joss the benefit of the doubt on this one. My feeling is that Wash's death WILL prove to have a deeper meaning than what we've already seen, and will be used to advance the story arcs in new ways. And it DID serve a purpose in the movie, in that once that happened, you had no idea if ANY of the rest of the crew were safe or not! Admit it: you were on the edge of your seat from that moment until the very end, wondering if Zoe, Simon, or Kaywinnet Lee - or even Mal Reynolds himself - were actually going to get out of there alive. That's tension for ya!

Mike

Grrrrr. Arrrgghh.

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:29 PM

CHRISISALL

Book's death was not unlike Obi-Wan's, and did serve a purpose (not that I LIKED it, but knowing Joss, people die- it's just the way of things...)

Chrisisall, shedding a tear...

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:32 PM

SPACEHOPPER

Quote:
Originally posted by Tholo:
After the River slaughter of the Reavers, how does she open the door???

The only thing I can figure is that she kicks a Reaver head to hit the door button. Why will it still open Kaylee fixed it not to open from the outside. OK River is smarter then Kaylee, but that would have to be pretty quick to stand in front of the door at the end.

Now this does not ruin the movie for me but I am sure none BC's will ask and I need to give a good answer.

Help

Keep Flying!

I don't think Kaylee rigged the door in the end, I don't remember seeing her do anything to the door or the button.

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:33 PM

RANDOMDAN

Quote:
Originally posted by Tholo:
After the River slaughter of the Reavers, how does she open the door???

Now this does not ruin the movie for me but I am sure none BC's will ask and I need to give a good answer.

As much as I loved seeing River framed in the doorway holding the axes (what a great shot!!), I had the same reaction as Tholo - didn't Kaylee fix that door not to open from the outside? Also, how did River open it while standing in the middle of the room, with, um, her hands full?

My theory is that the Alliance ship that was just outside the wall transmitted a code that overrode all of the internal locks in the complex. Seems like the type of technology that the Alliance would have had added to locks in the 'verse. Then, since the main entrance was still blocked by the Reaver ship, the troops busted through the outer wall and… well, we all know how that ended…

----
www.BrownQuote.com - customize your Google search homepage with a random Firefly quote!

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:41 PM

J6NGO1977

Cool answer Mike. thanks for letting me know it was the Alliance who killed Book. I know Mal always thought he was 'one of the crew' but i felt he was filmed as a secondary character which is not the case.

To be honest I've never beeen interested in Buffy or Angel (burn me later, im a witch .LOL), never thought they where bad shows but I trust what you say with Wash's death. However the guy was impaled. He's a list A. Firefly character and can't understand why Joss did that. However its the only canceled TV show thats gone to a major motion picture

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 4:42 PM

SPACEHOPPER

As for River standing in the middle of the room...

I like to think she either kicked the last Reaver into the button that opens the door or, even better, she pushed the button and quickly jumped into position to look really uber-cool (I know I would if I'd just taken out a bajillion angry men and women single-handedly and they were strewn at my feet, just to ram the point home to my crew that I totally rock and they should all be in awe of me. I'm pretty sure I'll never get the chance to do it though.)

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 5:08 PM

DANIELFYRE

OK I just have to add my two cents about the deaths in Serenity. Some of you are talking about the neccesity of the deaths...well death is never nessicary which may be a point Joss was tryin to make...or not but its a thought. Book's death I agree was almost needed to fuel Mal's character to put it all on the line. Wash's random death saddedned and surprised me, but in all honesty I think the story could have been propelled without the death of Wash. It was far too quick and random, but I suppose that is Joss's way (ex. Tara) to keep us on our toes. Ultimately though I think the Serenity crew is the heart of the story and taking out one, nevermind two characters messes with the whole fiber of the thing. I don't think Joss would kill characters off without having a true purpose for it or without plans to bring 'em back. Another reason I say this is because there is more that needs to be told especially about Book. We never learn his past and I think that past is a key aspect of the whole Firefly/Serenity storyline. It's not Joss's nature just to cut somethin off without explaining what happened which is really why the BDM was made to begin with. He couldn't let it go without sayin where it went, and that's exactly what he did with Book. If firefly does continue in some way I gurantee Book will come back in some fashion to tell his backstory, and going with this idea who's to say Wash won't either? I guess we'll have to wait and see and I see that this post is far too long as it is so I'll end it here...

-Dan

Ain't that just shiny?

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 5:32 PM

KWICKO

DanielFrye: I'm with ya on the Book thing - his story was one of THE most interesting of the whole crew's in the TV series. Before even knowing that there was a movie coming out, my wife and I watched through the DVD set of the series, and after it was over, we started talking about our questions that we most wanted answers to. Tops on both of our lists was "Who the heck was Book in his previous life?" "What's Book's backstory?" That would've provided at least a whole season's worth of episodes, just exploring how and why Book came to be a Shepherd...

My personal feeling is that he was once an Operative. He knows sooooo much about that world and how it thinks and works, and he says that Operatives truly believe in what they are doing; they'll kill people without even asking why, just acting on blind faith in the Alliance and their mission. The Operative's exchange with Mal at the end of the movie tends to bear out something along these lines - he tells Mal he'll never see him again because there's nothing left to see, indicating that his eyes have been opened to the fact that he is a hollow, empty shell. He sounded to me like a man about to take the first step on the journey of a thousand miles, searching for his lost soul and some sort of redemption. Seems like just the kind of journey Shepherd Book might have undertaken at some point in his murky past...

Of course, Joss being Joss, that's far too easy and obvious an explanation, and nothing in his universe ever seems to fit together as neatly and easily as I think it will - which makes it all the more entertaining to watch, in my opinion. Most shows get boring to me because I can figure out where they're going. Joss always manages to surprise me, and usually manages to upset me at least a little bit with some of his nastier surprises. I admire the man for that ability.

As for River opening the door... I just take it that River's abilities and knowledge are so far beyond us that locks and such don't really even exist for her except in the sense that they're simple puzzles, easily solved. Sure, Kaylee might have rigged the lock so a Reaver couldn't open it, but how do you rig it so RIVER can't figure it out, when even she doesn't know how much she knows? If math, physics, martial arts, and gunfights are mere child's play to her, what challenge can a simple lock offer? Of course, if that's the case, why didn't she simply walk out of the Alliance's secret facility on her own? Hmmmm...

For Wash's death, I'll take it on faith that there's a bigger reason for it than we've seen. Will he be back? My bet is that he will, at least in flashbacks or "prequel" form, but it would seem a lot harder in THIS Whedonverse to bring someone back from the dead... Same goes for Book - there's still an awful lot we don't know about him, and it's very "un-Joss" to leave such a rich story just hanging.

Mike

Grrrrr. Arrrgghh.

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 5:50 PM

CARTOON

As much as Book's and Wash's deaths were grievous to us fans, I hope that Joss will not bring them back. Sure, flashbacks and prequels are okay, but no "they didn't really die" or "they were miraculously recussitated" stories, please.

I hate it when writers kill off fictional characters, then bring them back. I hated it when they did it with Jean Grey in X-Men (and just about every other instance where it's been done). A writer just doesn't kill off characters he's so painstakenly developed without good reason. To bring them back as an afterthought is criminal. They should've left Jean Grey dead, and I hope Joss doesn't bring back those he's killed off.

As much as I enjoyed Wash & Book, it would hurt the story to bring back a character once they've been killed. (One exception I can think of that actually worked, and didn't cheapen the story, was Doyle's return of Sherlock Holmes.)

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 8:05 PM

JUMPY

I don't think Joss would be so tacky as to bring them back from the dead :D. I mean sure, he did it in Buffy I'm pretty sure (I never watched it episode after episode) but then again the show deals with the occult and heaven/ hell etc. so its not AS far-fetched.

__________________________
There's no show I'd rather see, than the one with Serenity.
You can't take the sky from me...

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

Sunday, December 25, 2005 10:57 PM

PBI

It's hard to know what I think about the deaths of Wash and Book, primarily because I'd been exposed to spoilers about their fate before I acquired the DVD; same goes for the origin of the Reavers. Given that their deaths didn't have quite the shock value they should have because of my prior knowledge, it's Book's death I have the biggest problem with. Not that I liked him better than Wash; I don't, I like all the crew. My ambivalence over Book's death relates more to the fact that, in the movie, he was introduced, had a scene, then he's dead. It all seemed so...washed-out and two dimentional, somehow, and not nearly up to the standards of Firefly.

The suddenness of the two deaths, that I could accept; it turns the standard hero death scene completely on its head and does accomplish the task of putting the survival of the entire crew in doubt. Maybe my misgivings stem from the movie format, itself. I had the vague impression that Joss might have been attempting too much because of the 'larger' format and that because of that, the tight focus we've come to know and love from the series was somewhat diluted. It's annoying, really, this absence of a complete 'wow' reaction to the BDM on my part and at the same time not being able to pin down the exact reasons :)

I'd give the BDM a 6.5 or 7 out of 10; it didn't suck, but it also doesn't rank up there in the top quality category, either.

Oh, and this is most definitely NOT the only cancelled series ever to be made into a movie; Star Trek accomplished that feat in 1979. Serenity, IS, however, a member of a very select club in the particulars of how it managed to get to the big screen.

If you can survive death, you can probably survive almost anything.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 4:24 AM

J6NGO1977

Quote:

Oh, and this is most definitely NOT the only cancelled series ever to be made into a movie; Star Trek accomplished that feat in 1979. Serenity, IS, however, a member of a very select club in the particulars of how it managed to get to the big screen.

.

Of course how could I forget the mighty Star Trek. Apologies for the oversight it was Christmas day. I'd been drinking allday Im surprised what I wrote made any sense .LOL.

I totally agree on Books death It just didn't feel validated.

I did like how the end was played out when Mal was fighting the bounty hunter. When Mal was getting his ass kicked I expected River to turn up and then a big finale fight follow but this never happened and Mal eventually went on to win. That was nicely done.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 8:25 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I have to disagree with the character’s not changing. Movie River is not the same as TV River. And it’s a major change, because it reverses the whole theme. Where Firefly was about the underdogs struggling to survive in the pond, Serenity is, to some extent, Buffy in space. River’s transformation from helpless victim to superheroine changes the whole dichotomy. Now that’s not a show stopper. I liked what they did with River, but I’m not a River man. I thought her and Simon made a good subplot, but the story was always about Mal, his crew and the Serenity, not a super chick fighting demons. And I thought the River scenario hurt the credibility of the movie. Look, I’m not sexist, but a 90 lb girl cannot put enough force behind a punch to do the kind of damage River was doing. I’m sorry, but as a physicist, I have to call bullshit. It was one thing for Buffy to do it, she was supposed to be some kind of supernatural superheroine, River was not. River was just a girl with, perhaps, some kind of psychic powers derived from surgical manipulation, but making her also magically strong is dumb. There I said it, sue me.

On the other hand, I liked Wash’s death. I thought that was an important twist. Wash was a throw away character. He was a sidekick and he had no real story to tell. The only reason Wash was even memorable was because of how well Allan Tudyk played him. So killing Wash punctuated the storyline without sacrificing anything crucial to the story and that only made the movie better. Tudyk’s excellent acting talent will be missed but the loss of the character Wash will not affect the show drastically and it creates a plausible device by which River, as the new pilot, becomes a functional member of the crew.

Book’s death, I think, was a mistake. Although I understood why they did it, there were too many untold stories to kill off Book. Better it would have been for them to find some way of getting more use of out of Wash’s death, which I think was way underplayed. I do see the Obi-wan analogy, but I also think it was forced.

I thought Jewel made a better Kaylee when she was a little plumper, but all in all I wasn’t disappointed with Kaylee. Simon, Zoe, Jayne and Mal did not seem to suffer any noticeable transformations to the big screen.

I was happy to see some use of automatic weapons by the crew. I’ve always thought that the strict adherence to the image of the late 19th century small arms was a little overdoing it. It doesn’t really make a lot of sense that in a future in which firearms remain common weapons for fugitives and petty criminals, the only weapons they have available to them are revolvers and pump and leveler actions. It sort of belies the proliferation of automatic small arms. But that’s a small thing.

I wasn’t displeased with the movie, but I make no bones about it, I preferred the show on TV. I think Firefly may have suffered upon transformation to the big screen. It might have lost some of its raw honesty and became more of the kind of theatrical flashy superhero stuff that Hollywood loves so much. Still, I don’t think the transformation was that bad. They stayed true to the original in most cases and where they departed, it is hard to tell if that was done for Hollywood’s sake or if that is the direction the show would have taken if give a few seasons to mature. The real problem is that there are just too many important characters, too many sub plots and too complex of a theme to tell in a movie. This is a story that can only be adequately told in a venue in which each arc can be drawn out in episodic fashion.

Also the Star Trek comparison is a poor one, I think. Star Trek was canceled in 1969 and did not go directly to a movie. In fact it was 10 years before the movie came out and when it did, the set, the characters and the even story had undergone considerable changes. In effect the 1979 Star Trek movie was a rerendering of the 1960s tv show, much as superman and batman movies. That’s completely different from Firefly being canceled in 2002, and its director/writer continuing straight from the cancelled show to promote and make a movie that released 3 years later and resembles in all but the minutest detail the original show.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 10:26 AM

LEAM

I've read the "buffy in space" thing in lots of places now, mostly by ppl who didnt like the film, and i just dont see it. I mean, how many river's action scenes are there?. As far as i remember, the one in the pub where she start randomly to kick peeps and the one against the rivers (correct me if i'm wrong, i havent seen it many times... yet). I think that the history is much more based arround Mal, and the crew as a whole.

About her being "magicaly strong", i think that many of us saw that coming. She read minds, is being followed by some guys who can make you bleed through the eyes with a blue lantern, and killed 3 guys in 3 shoots with the eyes closed... the alliance was making a super killing machine. Of course she had "super habilities" like buffy, just in a sci-fi way :P. reading minds is as impossible as a 90lbs girl hitting so hard, but hey, it's sci-fi. If you make read minds possible, then you make telekinesis possible, then you make a 90lbs girl able to hit as hard as his mind can.. i guess you follow me :)

Well, overall, i loved the film, i felt sad with the deads of book and wash, but prolly we wont see any more firefly :'(, so it's not like we will miss em in future chapters.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 10:33 AM

FLYINGTAMS

Quote:
Originally posted by j6ngo1977:
The characters have not changed from Firefly which was the biggest worry I had.

Interesting you think that. I thought mal was an unlikable psychopath in the movie. I also wondered why people compared him to Han Solo - I *like* Han Solo.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 2:01 PM

J6NGO1977

Ok I can understand what you are saying about the characters changing. However, as I see it, Joss produced evolved characters for the movie. If Firefly continued, what you witnessed in the movie is what you would have seen in season 2. So to me there was no change in the characters it was just an accelerated evolution.

I don't think Mal was an unlikeable Psychopath. I take you think that because he put a gun on the crew. Mal has always thought he knows best and he cares about his crew. So if it's a toss up between threatening his crew at gunpoint or his crew and himself dieing he will do it. Remember Mal's seal of approval and friendship is by saying 'you are on my crew'. It is important for Mal to have that crew and a crew he can trust. Using a gun is just his way.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 2:23 PM

PBI

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Also the Star Trek comparison is a poor one, I think. Star Trek was canceled in 1969 and did not go directly to a movie. In fact it was 10 years before the movie came out and when it did, the set, the characters and the even story had undergone considerable changes. In effect the 1979 Star Trek movie was a rerendering of the 1960s tv show, much as superman and batman movies. That’s completely different from Firefly being canceled in 2002, and its director/writer continuing straight from the cancelled show to promote and make a movie that released 3 years later and resembles in all but the minutest detail the original show.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

None of which changes the fact that Star Trek did go from cancelled series to movie, a direction refutation of the comment in the audio commentary and other dvd extras that Firefly was the only series to do so. It might be the only series to make the transition so quickly, but that's not the claim that's being made :)

If you can survive death, you can probably survive almost anything.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 2:45 PM

MOOSE

And don't forget Police Squad!...

It only lasted 6 episodes in 1982, then jumped onto the big screen in 1988 as The Naked Gun.

As far as the deaths of Book and Wash go, I agree with an earlier post. I hope that they do stay dead, despite those two being my favorite character.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 2:49 PM

TOMSIMPSONAZ

Now the series can skip over the whole 2nd season and get on to fighting the alliance.....

I can live with that :)

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 3:31 PM

URSULA

Quote:
Originally posted by Tholo:
After the River slaughter of the Reavers, how does she open the door???

Hey, River can kill you with her brain. No great stretch to opening doors with her mind.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 4:01 PM

DONCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by SpaceHopper:
Quote:
Originally posted by Tholo:
After the River slaughter of the Reavers, how does she open the door???

The only thing I can figure is that she kicks a Reaver head to hit the door button. Why will it still open Kaylee fixed it not to open from the outside. OK River is smarter then Kaylee, but that would have to be pretty quick to stand in front of the door at the end.

Now this does not ruin the movie for me but I am sure none BC's will ask and I need to give a good answer.

Help

Keep Flying!

I don't think Kaylee rigged the door in the end, I don't remember seeing her do anything to the door or the button.

Oh, but she did. I thought I saw this in one of my theatrical viewings, and I wuz right... I confirmed it on the DVD.

Watch the scene where River freaks out: "They're all made up of rage!" and watch carefully as Jayne picks up her gun and heads back to his position. You'll see Kaylee moving away from the door controls with a tool in her hand. She's just finished rigging the doors to latch closed.

I'm of the school that believes the Alliance issued an override.

But here's another question: why did the doors just happen to fail in the not-quite-closed position? I understand it from a storytelling perspective, but what's the technical justification? Did Kaylee screw up her rigging job? Forgiveable, as she was pretty freaked out at the time. Or did they just malfunction in a fortunately unfortunate way?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 4:07 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Too many words.

Maybe someone already said this, I did not read all of the posts.

I always had the impression that it was a Reaver that opened the door. They are far from idiots, so I figured one overrode the door but River killer him/her/it/other before the door actually started to open. Then she killed any leftovers and was left in the middle of the room.

The idea that the alliance did it by remote would make the timing more sensible though.

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

Monday, December 26, 2005 10:02 PM

BROWNCOATER

I personally felt Book's death did not serve a purpose. Why go to all the trouble to create a secret, hidden past for a character to just kill him off before it's revealed?
My guess is Ron Glass didn't want to commit to another series, or a long string of films.

"What'd y'all order a dead guy for?"
Jayne Cobb

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 7:36 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Look, I’m not sexist, but a 90 lb girl cannot put enough force behind a punch to do the kind of damage River was doing. I’m sorry, but as a physicist, I have to call bullshit. It was one thing for Buffy to do it, she was supposed to be some kind of supernatural superheroine, River was not. River was just a girl with, perhaps, some kind of psychic powers derived from surgical manipulation, but making her also magically strong is dumb. There I said it, sue me.

You'll be receiving legal notice shortly.

I thought about this, and about the possible stamina she could have. If you could react perfectly to any incoming motion and put as little as 10 pounds of force in the proper spot (eyes, throat, tendons in knees, etc.), you could do major damage with minimum effort....of course this would take near psychic aim. HEY! She IS a psychic!

Plus, she was using really sharp things she got off the Reavers.

Does that help you buy it all a little bit more, Finn?

When the opponent expands, I contract. When he contracts, I expand...Chrisisall

P.S., Buffy wouldn't have been able to beat that many Reavers; she's been known to have a problem with just one normal vamp (see: Fool For Love

)

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 8:10 AM

DONCOAT

Quote:
Originally posted by Browncoater:
I personally felt Book's death did not serve a purpose. Why go to all the trouble to create a secret, hidden past for a character to just kill him off before it's revealed?
My guess is Ron Glass didn't want to commit to another series, or a long string of films.

I can tell you for absolute certain that Ron Glass was *anything* but happy about having his character killed off. Have a look at the reports from the recent Flanvention to see what I mean.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 9:22 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

For some reason people seem to believe that one needs power to do damage, it simply isn't true.

Hit somebody with a big rock and watch the minimal effect, hit somebody with a little rock carrying the same momentum (or perhaps far less) in a more opportune place and watch them do an involuntary back flip and die before their body has settled.

River had speed and precision, that is all someone needs. Sharp objects and knowledge of biology do help more than somewhat though.

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 9:37 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
You'll be receiving legal notice shortly.

I thought about this, and about the possible stamina she could have. If you could react perfectly to any incoming motion and put as little as 10 pounds of force in the proper spot (eyes, throat, tendons in knees, etc.), you could do major damage with minimum effort....of course this would take near psychic aim. HEY! She IS a psychic!
Plus, she was using really sharp things she got off the Reavers.

Does that help you buy it all a little bit more, Finn?

I guess, I can buy that, but what about the guy who clocked her in the face during the bar fight? How do we explain that one? It seems to me that one shot gets through and she should be down for the count. I think I would be okay with the whole thing much more, in fact, I might not have noticed it at all, if it hadn’t been for that punch.

Anyway it was a small (though crucial) part of the movie. I’ve learned to overlook it, in appreciation of its many fine points.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
P.S., Buffy wouldn't have been able to beat that many Reavers; she's been known to have a problem with just one normal vamp (see: Fool For Love)

Buffy was very fickle like that. Sometimes she could kick a lot of vampire butt, and another time a seemingly harmless vampire would be slapping her all around.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 2:41 PM

BROWNCOATER

QUOTE]I can tell you for absolute certain that Ron Glass was *anything* but happy about having his character killed off. Have a look at the reports from the recent Flanvention to see what I mean.

Well, that makes it doubly s*cko that he was killed off.

"What'd y'all order a dead guy for?"
Jayne Cobb

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 5:58 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
but what about the guy who clocked her in the face during the bar fight? How do we explain that one? It seems to me that one shot gets through and she should be down for the count. I think I would be okay with the whole thing much more, in fact, I might not have noticed it at all, if it hadn’t been for that punch.

I took note of this too, and I knew you were gonna bring it up. Look closely and you'll see her roll with it, not accepting the force of the blow; the sound effect is purely for dramatic effect, and poorly chosen, IMO. But you're right about a solid blow, everything depends on her avoiding even one from a strong arm.

And Buffy has Relative Powers Syndrome; her powers vary to meet the needs of the particular episode's script.

Holiday Punch-drunk Chrisisall

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 7:56 PM

FRASERBW

Firefly was always very grounded science fiction, avoiding faster than light travel or time travel. So I don't see Book and Wash being "reborn on the Genesis planet." But I also notice some time has gone by before the movie picks up. Book has left the crew as well as Inara (which you kinda see coming during the series). So it is possible that one or more stories (movies maybe) could be done during this time period to include Book and Wash (of course there is no indication that any of Book's mystery past has revealed to the crew prior to Serenity). But there is a lot going on in Book's past that needs to be shown (although this could be done in flashback in a story where they start investigating his past and remember times with Book and see scenes set in Book's past). So there is a realistic possibility of seeing them again.

But that aside, thier deaths really struck me deep while watching Serenity. It felt like a real loss because I knew these characters for only a handful of episodes, and became really invested in them, and then they were gone. Real bummer! But random death is part of the Joss-verse (kinda like real life) and Book's death was a strong motivation for Mal to risk it all, and Wash dying after Serenity is torn apart just sets it up for you to feel real jeopardy for the others (my god we're in the hands of a madman storyteller named Joss, and we don't know what will happen next!). Well I need to finish my stages of grief now.

Quote:
Originally posted by Jumpy:
I don't think Joss would be so tacky as to bring them back from the dead :D. I mean sure, he did it in Buffy I'm pretty sure (I never watched it episode after episode) but then again the show deals with the occult and heaven/ hell etc. so its not AS far-fetched.

__________________________
There's no show I'd rather see, than the one with Serenity.
You can't take the sky from me...

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

Tuesday, December 27, 2005 8:19 PM

FRASERBW

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
For some reason people seem to believe that one needs power to do damage, it simply isn't true.

Hit somebody with a big rock and watch the minimal effect, hit somebody with a little rock carrying the same momentum (or perhaps far less) in a more opportune place and watch them do an involuntary back flip and die before their body has settled.

River had speed and precision, that is all someone needs. Sharp objects and knowledge of biology do help more than somewhat though.

When one studies martial arts, you quickly learn that one can make up for size and strength with skill. 10lbs of force in the right location on the body can cause debilitating or lethal damage, and River is obviously been modified for that effect. This isn't physics, it's called biomechanics. And I haven't rewatched the River hit, but I've been hit enough times in the head inadvertently by people and objects (and a couple times purposefully by people) to know that you don't always drop (brain has to contact the side of the skullcase to cause unconciousness). I'm sure River's programing also makes her tougher than the average 90lb girl. As far as taking out Reavers, they are berzerkers and so don't fight in an organized fashion which makes it easier for a skilled combatant to take out a large number of them. Plus it is established that they don't live very healthy lifestyles, which perhaps makes them a little more fragile. And of course, if you are one person fighting a group you have the advantage of not worrying about who you hit but the Reavers swinging wildly at River would likely hit each other too (advantage River again).

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

Wednesday, December 28, 2005 9:19 AM

CHRISISALL

So, Finn, have ya watched it again? I watched it last night (AGAIN, let's see, that makes it what? 8 times on DVD now...?) and she definitly rolled- almost NO contact made. (Clumsy fighters sometimes get a mis-timed strike in; Bruce Lee observed that inexperienced opponents could sometimes pose the most problems...he called it Broken Rhythm, the cornerstone of the Drunken style)

Martial-arty Chrisisall

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

Wednesday, December 28, 2005 10:53 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
So, Finn, have ya watched it again? I watched it last night (AGAIN, let's see, that makes it what? 8 times on DVD now...?) and she definitly rolled- almost NO contact made. (Clumsy fighters sometimes get a mis-timed strike in; Bruce Lee observed that inexperienced opponents could sometimes pose the most problems...he called it Broken Rhythm, the cornerstone of the Drunken style)

Martial-arty Chrisisall

I call it Broken Jaw of a 90lb girl.

I did watch it, and I suppose you could interpret her head movement as rolling with the punch, then again there is the sound effect that makes it quite clear that there was contact. And as far as rolling with punches, let’s not forget that all of these punches and kicks were all choreographed fakes so if a head jerked appears to be rolled, it probably was in reality, but that doesn’t mean that is how it was supposed to be interpreted. The sound effect, I think, makes it quite clear that this was indeed intended to be understood as full contact. So I stand by my original interpretation. I don't think she’s rolling with the punch, rather she’s responding to a clearly full impact punch from someone clearly larger then her as if her momma just slapped her. I take that to mean that we are supposed to believe she is somehow magically strong, like Buffy.

The only other logical interpretation that I can think of is that there just wasn’t that much thought put into it to begin with. The choreographers or the writers never stopped to consider what impact this would have on the storyline, which I suppose it a possibility. Though I’m inclined to believe the former considering her clash with the Reavers. I think the story is intended to be, at least in part, about a superheroine, which is a departure from the tv show, at least as much as I understood it.

-------------
Qui desiderat pacem praeparet bellum.

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

Wednesday, December 28, 2005 6:26 PM

CHRISISALL

The sound effect does tend to take away the opening for interpretation I suggest, but I stand by my assumption that she rolled with it, 'cause...I do. It don't make sense that she could take a shot like that from a big guy. So...she didn't.

P.S., I told my lawyer to halt on the sueing thing.

Chrisisall, secure in what he WANTS to believe
(but understanding AND comprehending it)

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE