Fillion says he would return as Mal by Gurney

I don't really want to be a big downer but I don't put any stock in that interview. I mean for starters they're making the wild claim that Castle would be canceled and over with. It's doing far too well right now to be canceled anytime soon. Nathan would be a fool to walk away from such a successful show. So, basically it's saying if somehow Firefly was magically resurrected and Castle was magically canceled THEN would you consider going back to Firefly. Well yeah he'd probably consider just about any show at that point. Not much of a hypothetical IMO.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 6:55 AM

When it's time to go, he'll move on, whether he can make oodles more money or not. At some point, eventually every show meets the end of their myth arc, and nothing else can be milked from the formula. When Castle gets like that, I hope it'll go out with grace and style.

As for Nathan, the guy's got a history of being willing to take risks and "for the art." If he only cared about a steady paycheck, he'd still be in daytime soaps.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 7:07 AM

PLATONIST

A much more in-depth interview with Nathan, sometime last week,

Doing a Serenity sequel or trilogy would fit into his TV schedule, not sure of replacing one with the other.

And aww…he Tweets Inara over Kate, too, right there with ya on that one buddy;)

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 7:08 AM

Risks? What risks? Firefly is probably the riskiest but what up and coming actor turns down a prime time broadcast network role? I doubt they consider that a risk.

Dr. Horrible doesn't strike me as a risk either. It's not like he'd be locked into it if it didn't go well and I doubt it would sink his career if no one tuned in.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 7:35 AM

Let's see. Leaving daytime soaps to go to California hoping to make it big? That seems like a pretty big risk to me.

Firefly is another risky one - yes, it offered him a chance to be the lead role in a prime time slot, but it could've tanked... And point of fact, it did. Then he got in on reviving it as a movie, which also tanked financially. He took a risk, and there were pros and cons he got out of it.

I note that Firefly wasn't his first role as a main character, that probably goes to Two Guys and a Girl. I will concede that he still hadn't had a breakout role until Firefly, despite what happened, but that doesn't make it any less of a risk. Arguably Firefly might not even have been his breakout role, as he's since been involved in other quickly canceled series and voice acting.

Dr. Horrible admittedly wasn't that risky, granted the strike was over before it started filming so he could've found other jobs, but he was in that one more for the fun and not expecting to get much money out of it. So considering his expectations, it was also low risk.

Castle is also low risk (and maybe THIS is technically his breakout role), but that doesn't mean he's gone from a risk-taker to risk-adverse. He strikes me as a guy who goes after stories he likes and parts he thinks he can bring something special to, and that means he has a spread of both risky and not risky roles under his belt.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 8:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I don't really want to be a big downer but I don't put any stock in that interview. I mean for starters they're making the wild claim that Castle would be canceled and over with. It's doing far too well right now to be canceled anytime soon. Nathan would be a fool to walk away from such a successful show. So, basically it's saying if somehow Firefly was magically resurrected and Castle was magically canceled THEN would you consider going back to Firefly. Well yeah he'd probably consider just about any show at that point. Not much of a hypothetical IMO.

Uh, I think everyone knows it was just a hypothetical. Certainly Nathan did. I think you might be taking it a might bit too seriously. No ones really thinking this means they're going to cancel anything, or magically bring anything back...

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 8:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

Firefly is another risky one - yes, it offered him a chance to be the lead role in a prime time slot, but it could've tanked... And point of fact, it did. Then he got in on reviving it as a movie, which also tanked financially. He took a risk, and there were pros and cons he got out of it.

That's a pretty big reach. Being cast as the lead in a network show isn't a risk unless it's a bigger name stepping down (from movies or the like). But for a barely-known like Nathan was, it's a boon, plain and simple. Even if the show tanked, it's a lead credit, and a solid paycheck for at least a short time. Sure, there's the risk it could get canceled, but that goes with EVERY new show, so that's like saying it's brave and risky to walk outside 'cuz something bad could happen.

Like you said - it DID tank, and he got a signature role, a fiercely loyal fanbase, risiduals for years, a leading role in a feature film, and it opened the door for more series work. And that's the result of being canceled, the bad outcome. Pretty hard to say it was risky when the bad outcome set him up for life.

Even the movie wasn't risky for him, as it was his first lead in a big theatrical release. Again, not much down side for him.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 8:57 AM

All of that is true if you're clairvoyant and know it's going to turn out good in the first place. Otherwise, it's a risk. Everything is a risk, and you assess the risk, like you just did, by saying, "well, even if it tanked, I can get lead role credentials."

A scifi show in the friday night death slot on fox. it could be X-files, it could turn into an old shame. Nathan liked the story, liked Joss, liked who he was going to be working with, everyone took a shot, and in our estimation, it turned out good. In Fox's estimation and a few haters, it didn't.

Risk. It was always an underdog show and they knew it going in.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 9:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I don't really want to be a big downer but I don't put any stock in that interview. I mean for starters they're making the wild claim that Castle would be canceled and over with. It's doing far too well right now to be canceled anytime soon. Nathan would be a fool to walk away from such a successful show. So, basically it's saying if somehow Firefly was magically resurrected and Castle was magically canceled THEN would you consider going back to Firefly. Well yeah he'd probably consider just about any show at that point. Not much of a hypothetical IMO.

Uh, I think everyone knows it was just a hypothetical. Certainly Nathan did. I think you might be taking it a might bit too seriously. No ones really thinking this means they're going to cancel anything, or magically bring anything back...

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

Maybe I read the first three post differently than you but I see enthusiasm. Granted I think they know the show isn't being revived tomorrow, but even if it was I doubt Nathan would sign on.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 10:43 AM

Oh, I don't know. Saying it's his favorite role ever, even while on another show, I'd say he would. Dude loves Mal. At the least, I'm sure he'd seriously consider it.

Sure, it's not going to happen, but I get the impression he wishes it would as much as most fans.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 10:45 AM

WISHIMAY

Quote:
Originally posted by Platonist:
A much more in-depth interview with Nathan, sometime last week,

And aww…he Tweets Inara over Kate, too, right there with ya on that one buddy;)

Boy-howdy, "in depth" is right, by the end of that one I was thirsty... I think I'd already heard most of those stories, though the elaboration with the cat was funny stuffs...

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 11:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
All of that is true if you're clairvoyant and know it's going to turn out good in the first place.

That doesn't even make sense. It wasn't a hit, no clairvoyance involved in pointing out that it did flop, and it still turned out pretty well for him.

Quote:
Otherwise, it's a risk. Everything is a risk, and you assess the risk, like you just did, by saying, "well, even if it tanked, I can get lead role credentials."

Well, sure, everything carries some risk, but that's still stretching it. That goes back to the leaving the house analogy. Sure, the mule could have fallen on him while shooting or something, but career-wise - the lead on a network show is pretty much win-win for the actor, even if it is canceled. The risk was fairly insignificant.

Quote:
A scifi show in the friday night death slot on fox. it could be X-files, it could turn into an old shame. Nathan liked the story, liked Joss, liked who he was going to be working with, everyone took a shot, and in our estimation, it turned out good. In Fox's estimation and a few haters, it didn't.

So? The risk in that scenario was on Fox's part, as they footed the bill. Nathan profited from it, even when it flopped.

Quote:
Risk. It was always an underdog show and they knew it going in.

That's hindsight, and not very accurate at that. It was launched while Joss was running two hit shows, and Scifi was on an upswing in media. And again, in that case, the risk was mainly Fox's, and Joss to a lesser degree. It had a better chance than most new genre shows.

For Nathan, not a lot of down side, other than missing the role. For it to be a risk for him, there's have to be something to loose, and even with bad ratings and a cancellation, his career was the better for it.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 11:53 AM

Quote:
For it to be a risk for him, there's have to be something to loose, and even with bad ratings and a cancellation, his career was the better for it.

This is not risk, this is forecasting after the fact. You have to take the end results out of it, make them uncertain, and take into account the initial conditions to determine how much of a risk a decision was.

Fox may have given Firefly a chance, but they also were ready to axe it just about right from the beginning because it wasn't what they were looking for. Joss and the actors have all said they knew cancellation was hanging over them the entire series, and they knew pretty much right up front when they joined the cast that it was a good chance of cancellation.

So from the beginning, Firefly's fate looked pretty dire. Nathan chose to attach himself to what looked like a sinking property, a show that was a blend of two genres that at the time weren't too popular with the mainstream, in the hopes that his first role as an action lead would pay off with no telling how the critics would look at his performance.

It payed off in the end, yes, but that's not something they knew back then. NATHAN couldn't have known. He liked the characters, he liked the story, so he took a chance on it. Compared to other things he could have done for a steady paycheck, like gone back to soaps, and him not being an established actor, that's the DEFINITION of risk.

Quote:
It was launched while Joss was running two hit shows

That ended six months after Firefly was, and were never the hits the parent company wanted them to be. Firefly was a risk, Firefly was an underdog series. If you don't think so, well, then, heck, show me a world where Firefly had more than one season.

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 12:13 PM

Yeah....

None of which made it a particular risk to Nathan. Only upsides - even canceled.

The show not being a hit isn't really a risk, at least, not any more than it is for any show or any actor in the industry.

Going back to soaps would have arguably been riskier as a career move - as the chance of building a better career on a soap as slim. The lead role on a network show is automatically a better calling card for an actor than a soap.

For something to be a risk, there has to be a chance of being worse off for having done it (that, by the way, is the actual definition of risk –noun
1.exposure to the chance of injury or loss; a hazard or dangerous chance).

You have yet to show how that might have been. Aside from some freak accident - what exactly did he have to loose by taking on a bigger, better job than he'd ever been offered before?

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

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

Friday, February 18, 2011 12:20 PM

It also means:

Quote:
4.to venture upon; take or run the chance of.

You don't have to lose something, like money, or be injured, to have a negative effect from your choice that qualifies the scenario for risk assessment.

As I said, it was his first role as an action lead, he didn't know for sure how the critics were going to respond to his performance. If they panned him, chances are that would have been his career.

Or, if Firefly REALLY tanked, and never even got the cult status it has now, it might have been a negative to even be associated with it.

They didn't know how it could turn out, things looked bad at the beginning, so just getting involved with Firefly was a risk. It was a good thing they did.

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

Saturday, February 19, 2011 7:47 AM

OPPYH

Still think a direct to dvd short series would be the ticket. After all the Firefly dvd sets sold like hell on wheels. They proved there was a huge demand for Firefly.

This is what kills me. Nathan is certainly game, Joss would probably do it in an instant. The rest of the crew I'm sure would hop on board.

There has to be a way. There has to.

----------------------------------------------------------------

70's TV FOREVER

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

Saturday, February 19, 2011 12:36 PM

ZZETTA13

Ya gotta love Nathan. Brownist-Browncoat there ever was. The guy has kept a positive outlook about the BDTVS ( Best Damn TV Show) that ever was, and I admire him for it. My gosh, all of the cast & crew of that wonderful show still speak of how it was the best.

Hope to see them all ( Alan & Ron too) in future episodes of “The Continuing Adventures of Firefly”. Maybe on the Sy/Fy Channel or even the Science Channel!

WE HOLD!!

ZBP

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

Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:14 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by zzetta13:
Ya gotta love Nathan. Brownist-Browncoat there ever was.

Absolutely!

The laughing Chrisisall

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

Sunday, February 20, 2011 4:34 AM

REDLAVA

If I got $300 million from the California Lottery, the first thing I would do is buy the rights to Firefly, make it on my own, and distribute it on the Internet.

OK. Everybody on this sight buy Nathan 10 lottery tickets and mail them to him. We might get lucky...

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

Monday, February 21, 2011 6:27 AM