Quote:

---

Originally posted by Katesfriend:
There's no Firefly without Mal. Joss based the series on him, so the alternative is to shoot when the actors are available. I can't imagine the actors not bending over backwards to be available to do more Firefly.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by asarian:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Katesfriend:
There's no Firefly without Mal. Joss based the series on him, so the alternative is to shoot when the actors are available. I can't imagine the actors not bending over backwards to be available to do more Firefly.

---

I agree with every singly word.


--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Platonist:
An absolute NO, to a Firefly series without Mal (unless it is a completely new tale in the verse with new characters), until we have, at the very least, a miniseries, a feature length film, or a straight to DVD of either of these, which resolves unanswered storylines, like Inara's secret.

And… huh… okay, how does this whole Mal/Kaylee and Simon/Inara hook up thingy work? Because I must of have been absent that day. Opposites or not, they are all on the ship bound by the need of freedom. The reasons of why and how they got on the boat may be different, like Mal says, but essentially they are seeking the same thing. Freedom is their bonding commonality, not what they are trained to do. These are people, not mechanical, doctoring, companioning bots.

I’m not sure how portraying strong loving relationships within a family structure screws with the dynamics of the show, considering that one of the defining themes of the show is the strength of family and the ties that bind. So, I’m going to need some elaboration on that comment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by zzetta13:
Actually there are certain elements ( and people) that I feel a successful tv program or movie can not do without. Mal Reynolds (Nathan) being one of them as pertaining to FF. He could not be replace with another actor and could not be a character that just wandered in from time to time either. Captain Reynolds was the main character and the glue that kept all of the other crew in place.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by zzetta13:
Actually there are certain elements ( and people) that I feel a successful tv program or movie can not do without. Mal Reynolds (Nathan) being one of them as pertaining to FF. He could not be replace with another actor and could not be a character that just wandered in from time to time either. Captain Reynolds was the main character and the glue that kept all of the other crew in place.

---

Said it before in other threads, but I'll say it here again: There is no sense to the notion that only one actor can ever play any character-- look at James Bond, or Batman. Or can you imagine Mel Gibson being the only actor to ever play Hamlet?

Mal is an interesting, complex character-- different actors coming to the same role bring different things, cause different responses. That's the basis of live theatre. Example, Zero Mostel played Pseudolus in the Broadway production of A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To the Forum, and the film version, even though the role was written for Phil Silvers. I saw Silvers do it in the 1980's revival. Sometime in the 90's Nathan Lane did it on Broadway. When he left the show, he was replaced by Whoopi Goldberg. All 4 were *F*U*N*N*Y*, incredibly so. But they were all different.

S'been done in TVland , too, usually only with minor characters... Lionel in All In The Family and the Jeffersons, and Darrin Stevens in Bewitched.

Not sayin' folks don't have a right to prefer one actor over another, or that the chemistry doesn't change, or that it's easy and doesn't take careful writing and skilled acting, but it can be done.

---