Quote:

---

Originally posted by GOLDBRICK:
Bah, she admits it was an expensive show. Probably more expensive than they expected. So they sabotaged it by airing it out of order, preempting it constantly, moving it around, not promoting it, the whole nine yards. Create a ratings problem and then hide behind it.

Always follow the money...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InvaderPet87:


I suppse she was afraid of being accused of giving Whedon special treatment. That's studio politics for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GOLDBRICK:
Bah, she admits it was an expensive show. Probably more expensive than they expected. So they sabotaged it by airing it out of order, preempting it constantly, moving it around, not promoting it, the whole nine yards. Create a ratings problem and then hide behind it.

Always follow the money...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InvaderPet87:


But if a show isn't making much money for you, why sabotage it so it makes even less money for you?

"She understands. She doesn't comprehend."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
ALMOST sounds like an apology...

"I was just following orders...I did what I had to do...Doesn't matter anyway..."

Mebbe they really DO realize how much they shot themselves in the foot...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
And as much as people like to claim there was no advertising, I personally saw a BUNCH of ads for the show, so I can't buy that excuse. I also don't think airing it out of order made that much difference, as it wasn't a particularly serialized show.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
I'm no longer interested in why they cancelled it. But I would like someone at Fox to explain why they don't bring it back.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:
FOX didn't like the 2 hour pilot so they had Joss rework it, and then they still didn't like the rework. They wanted action from the start that's why "The Train Job" was 1st, when the ratings when down and they saw how much the show cost to make and they lost interest in it. Joss shopped it around to all the networks including SyFy (which NOW is so in love with "Firefly" and "Serenity") but they passed.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InvaderPet87:

I love how she puts up the usual defense and blames ratings, and thinks airing the episodes in order wouldn't have made things better.

For someone who's supposed to be a friend of Whedon's she doesn't go into any real detail about why she couldn't have pulled some strings to keep it on one more season, AND PROMOTE it just to see if numbers might increase.

I suppse she was afraid of being accused of giving Whedon special treatment. That's studio politics for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by micjwelch:

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet - The fact that this article exists means that we're gaining momentum! We got someone's attention!

---

Quote:

---

I'd say two very big reasons:

1) Everybody's busy.

2) Serenity still didn't make much, so it's already had one unsuccessful re-launch. Doesn't exactly make another go look like a safe bet.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by two:

Until Berman and her friend, Joss, can speak freely without fear of retribution, we won't be getting the real dirt on why Firefly was premiered during the World Series on Fox in the Friday Night Death Slot or why the first two episodes were shown last and the others in scrambled order. None of that can possibly be Berman's ideas of how to promote a show.

Maybe someday Berman will write a short article about the Firefly fiasco like Bob Woodward did about the Iraq fiasco and Donald Rumfeld:

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Spacejanitor:
If I had a dollar for every baseball game I tuned into expecting Firefly...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by micjwelch:
Something that hasn't been mentioned yet - The fact that this article exists means that we're gaining momentum! We got someone's attention!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MalsDoxy:
they were always peeved at Joss for moving Buffy, plain and simple...the vermin

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Storymark:
Now, the effectiveness of the advertising is a decent subject of debate. People say the ads didn't do the show justice, and I can sympathize. The ads wre a bit silly.

But then, it was a tough nut to crack in terms of advertising. The things easier to market are those that fit into an easily defined box - and that aint Firefly.

The ads for Serenity took an entirely different style and approach, which to me was more representative than the ads for the show - and it still didn't turn on the masses.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InvaderPet87:
I love how she puts up the usual defense and blames ratings, and thinks airing the episodes in order wouldn't have made things better.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 11thHour:

The Firefly Episode FOX 2002 Airing Schedule:
_______________________________________________________________

09/20/02 “The Train Job”
09/27/02 ------ Pre-Empted by World Series ----- “Bushwhacked”
10/04/02 ------ Pre-Empted by World Series ----- “Our Mrs. Reynolds”
10/11/02 ------ NO FIREFLY ----------
10/18/02 “Jaynestown”
10/25/02 “Out of Gas”
11/01/02 “Shindig”
11/08/02 “Safe”
11/15/02 "Ariel"
11/22/02 ------ NO FIREFLY ----------
11/29/02 ------ NO FIREFLY ----------
12/06/02 "War Stories"
12/13/02 "Objects in Space"
12/20/02 "Serenity" [Pilot]
_______________________________________________________________

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by TheSomnambulist:
Storymark wrote:

Quote:

---

I'd say two very big reasons:

1) Everybody's busy.

2) Serenity still didn't make much, so it's already had one unsuccessful re-launch. Doesn't exactly make another go look like a safe bet.

---

Those are two reasons.

However:

The Thing. A prequel is currently under production based on John Carpenter's 1981 The Thing which was a flop. (financially speaking)

Tron Legacy. A Reboot of the 1981 Disney box office flop Tron.

Blade Runner. Currently talks are under way for either sequel or prequel or maybe both with possibility of a TV show as well.

---

Quote:

---

Serenity at least made it's return in a shorter time than it took the three examples I've just mentioned. It would be prudent as you point out not to take the risk of course. Can't argue with that. However a studio must surely consider the weight of the show's leading actor. Nathan Fillion. With the success of Castle, right now he's very well known and seeminlgy a hearthrob. He does the chat show circuit, features on magazine covers and creates a buzz around much of what he does. He is not alone either. Morena and Summer are both making impacts within the industry. Granted no waves as yet but the ripples are there. Similarly Alan is always mentioned in many new up and coming shows.

---

Quote:

---

As for time constraints. Yes that's a big problem. But it can be worked round. Michael J. Fox famously continued working on Family Ties whilst working on Back To The Future.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by InvaderPet87:
I vaguely recall Universal promoting "Serenity" as a comedy sci-fi film, as opposed to just a sci-fi action flick.

"Do you want to run this ship?"
"Yes!"
"..... Well.... you can't!"

That exchange between Mal and Jayne was in every single promo I think.

I also don't recall many of the other characters being highlighted. Not even River or Simon.

"She understands. She doesn't comprehend."

---

Quote:

---

I really don't see how it was sabotaged. They did for it what they do for any new show. People here tend to look at things through the subjective lens of nearly a decade of pining for the show - but at the time, it was a new show that cost a lot to make that they pushed just as much as any of their other new shows - it just didn't catch on in time.

---