Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:


I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:


A second metaphor would be the killing of Wash. Wash was the unathletic Hawaian shirt wearing guy who was quirky and funny. Well, I guess the new Firefly has no room for him; he gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character. The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

---

Quote:

---

The strength of Firefly was that it was a Western dressed as Sci-Fi.

---

Quote:

---

[Wash] gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character.

---

Quote:

---

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ndrage85:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

---

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ndrage85:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

---

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

---

It's true that it is unrealistic to expect the movie to be exactly the same as the series. Things are different. At the same time... I think that it could have been better. Ever watch Babylon 5 movies? They weren't big screen affairs, but many were even better than individual episodes.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by ndrage85:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

---

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by nevered:
if you listen to the DVD commentary, you also learn that the presence of simon and river on serenity means that they've had to stay away from the central planets, declining jobs that would put them in alliance spotlight.

mal is touchier and angrier in the movie than he is in the series because he's making a lot less than he would is the Tams weren't on board.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
that is true. And I would be fine with that except that the scene where Simon is playing secret operative is a flashback scene, not a present scene. All it would have taken to keep it true in spirit would have been a short shot showing his hesitation, his overcoming his meek nature. I have the feeling that the whole project was also very rushed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
Except that he doesn't show anger at all during the duration of the series. This sudden anger is new and forced (perhaps also a result of Fillion playing a villain in Angel during the interim period?)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lookatthatbird:
And since when is Mal so angry?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Omelet:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

---

If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j6ngo1977:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Omelet:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

---

If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

---

Yep I agree. You hit the nail on the head. Serenity aint Firefly. As I said before If I was stranded on a desert island with a DVD player (it was in a water tight case. don't argue .lol) and I had a choice between Serenity and 1 episode of Firefly. Give me 'Out of Gas' every time

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by adlai:
The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:
You know, I'm gonna go all purist myself and say that only the pilot is real 'Firefly', everything else is an abberation or perversion of the original idea (ie, no change or growth allowed).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by christhecynic:


Clearly the movie was far too much of a happy-cheery sugar-coated affair to be worthy of the Firefly crew and fans.

---