Exploring why FF/ Serenity wasn't more popular... by chrisisall

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Exploring why FF/ Serenity wasn't more popular...

POSTED BY: CHRISISALL
UPDATED: Sunday, April 9, 2006 15:38
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4081
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, April 6, 2006 6:25 AM

Joss had Buffy going-a big hit. Angel was launching, it ran 5 seasons.
Then Joss got it into his head to create something quirky, yet somewhat more serious. He decided to take a chance, and develope a show that explored a larger world(s), and by extention, bigger issues.
He created real people, not just heroes and villians. In short- it was a fluke it was made. Good timing.
Buffy and Angel had their day, and Wonder Woman will surely soar to great (and profitable) heights, but, with FF/Serenity, Joss took his shot at what might be the most personal statement that we will see in his work, for the time, anyway.

Personel freedom is important and sometimes in danger; Governments and corporations see you as a means to an end and no more.(My take, for what it's worth)

He didn't make FF or Serenity to make money, so they didn't. He made them to be great, which is not always easily recognized by the general public.
Some more Hollywood clout later, he may do it again, but for now, FF/Serenity will be doing a 'Blade Runner', that is, slowly building in cult status untill it is inevitably realized as the high water mark that it is.

Thoughts?

Chrisisall, a dandy, but good with his feet

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 6:39 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

I agree w/ you Chris. I believe you are right on w/ your assessment of Joss's message, as that is what I got out of it:

Personel freedom is important and sometimes in danger; Governments and corporations see you as a means to an end and no more.

Of course I would take it one step further and say that Joss wanted to show us just how important that freedom is and how if taken for granted we might very well lose it.

I do think that Joss focusing on creating a quality show instead of the typical Hollywood eye candy is part of why it was not more popular. To me Firefly was visionary, ahead of it's time, and the american viewing public was not ready for it. Viewers today seem to be more interested in T&A, sex, violence, reality tv, and huge explosions then they are witty writing, great chemistry in the cast, relatively unknown actors/actresses, and sci fi.

I think the blending of the sci fi & western genres hurt us a bit too. I personally love westerns, but I am the minority these days. Westerns have been on the decline in popularity since the 70s and let's face it, if it is not Star Wars or Star Trek the general population is not really interested in sci fi. Add the two together & it will chase off all but the most open minded.

__________________________________________

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Fans:

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/richmondbrowncoats/

http://www.richmondbrowncoats.org

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 6:59 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:

I think the blending of the sci fi & western genres hurt us a bit too. Add the two together & it will chase off all but the most open minded.

My best friend is one of the not-so open minded, it seems.

I must admit, seeing 'Train Job' before the pilot was what had me miss FF on it's initial run. The characters are SO important, that not 'getting' them made the show hard to watch (plus having a baby at the time made my TV viewing incredibly selective).

*positive note*
There seems to be a slow but sure Browncoat virus goin' around the local college, tho.

Non-inocked Chrisisall

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 7:21 AM

NUCLEARDAY

If I may add own experiences:

How to make this a short story? Okay: Trip down memory lane, year 2002. This Joss Whedon guy has all this fame and fortune from Buffy and the Angel spin-off, which I'd never really watched but knew it was pretty successful.

And he's got this Firefly show coming out on Fox. Kind of an ugly ship, a captain with a rather memorable nose, and Hel from Cleopatra 2525 :) Actually, I remember being pretty excited. Didn't have Sci-Fi channel anymore, so I was suffering from Farscape withdrawal, and it was about time we got another good science fiction show on a network channel. Looked like an interesting take on the genre.

Now, I work nights. I had to tape it, but I never remember to set my VCR. So, missed Train Job, but did catch Bushwhacked, which is not the best opener to the series. Knew I was missing something, but liked what I saw. Funny, dark, and that mechanic chick was cute. Tried to tape some more eps, but kept missing them or getting the date wrong. Plus IIRC they kept moving the showtimes around, which is really easy to keep track of when you don't have internet, cable, or TV guide :) Wasn't too worried though. I figured this Whedon guy already had two hit shows under hit belt, so this must be a done deal. Surely there'd be a second season. I'll just catch the reruns in the off-season before season 2 starts up.

So, I was wrong. Obviously.

I just sort of figured it was a sure thing. Sure, in hindsight I know what I was missing. I wouldn't be suprised, though, if I'm not alone in my experience. I kept waiting for them to rerun the first episodes so I'd know what was going on (and I also thought I was alot further behind than one episode) :)

For me, I sorta wished they'd kept the airing dates a tad more regular. And I also agree, things may have gone differently is they'd opened the series with a "special television event" of the pilot episode and hyped the living frell out of it.

(hmm... that wasn't such a short story...

)

________________________________________________
You can take my hope when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 7:30 AM

KINROEDARKSTONE

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
My best friend is one of the not-so open minded, it seems.
I must admit, seeing 'Train Job' before the pilot was what had me miss FF on it's initial run. The characters are SO important, that not 'getting' them made the show hard to watch (plus having a baby at the time made my TV viewing incredibly selective).

*positive note*
There seems to be a slow but sure Browncoat virus goin' around the local college, tho.

Non-inocked Chrisisall

In a way I'm sad that I didn't catch FF on it's first run. I would have loved it from that time through now, and would have been gorram angry to find it cancelled. Then again, I'm glad that I missed it. Since Fox had such a bunch of dim-wits for program execs, showing a series out of order and all, I got to see FF in Joss's intended order. Shiny!

___________________________________
Mal:Define interesting.
Wash: Oh God, oh God, we're going to die?

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 8:06 AM

THEDAVE

I didn't even know the show existed until I saw the movie. Poor advertising on Fox's part

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 8:21 AM

STAKETHELURK

I disagree that FF/S was “somewhat more serious” and “dealt with bigger issues” than “Buffy” and “Angel,” nor that the characters on those two shows were any less “real people.” I see no huge change in the depth of theme or characterization between the FF/S and the Buffyverse. And Joss doesn’t make any of his shows to make money, he makes them to be great—he assumes that if they’re great, the money will follow. (“Buffy” was never meant to be a cash cow; he didn’t even think they’d survive past their first season, he thought his concept might not pull people in). I remember an interview somewhere in which he says that he’d learned from “Buffy” and “Angel” just to make a great show and that was all he needed to do—with “Firefly,” he found out that just being a great show wasn’t enough.

What we need to do is step back a moment and look at Joss’ previous two shows. They were successful, yes, but where were they successful? On the netlets (WB & UPN), where a cult audience can (generally) keep a show afloat. Where was “Firefly?” On FOX, a network with bigger ambitions and thus bigger expectations. If you look at “Firefly’s” ratings, they were better than “Buffy” and “Angel”—“Firefly” would’ve been a break-out hit on a netlet with those ratings (of course, a netlet couldn’t have afforded to make the show, but that’s another matter). But they weren’t good enough for FOX, the network that had bungled any chance to pull in a wider audience with its poor advertising, poor scheduling, and general mismanagement. Whether “Firefly” could bring in more people even if it hadn’t been screwed up by FOX is an interesting question. (I suspect it may have ended up like “Angel,” a show that brought in a steady but moderate amount of viewers, but was perennially in danger of cancellation—until the damn WB finally axed it).

I mean, Joss’ two big “successes” were both essentially cult shows—“Buffy” managed to have a wider impact on popular culture, but its actual audience base was much more limited. Basically, none of Whedon’s shows has ever reached beyond a cult audience. This is despite their high quality, which leads me to wonder about the audience. Because I see no real difference in the “seriousness,” the “quirkiness,” and the “characterization” of all three shows, I begin to suspect that Whedon’s style in general may be off-putting to many people. I’ve read elsewhere that most TV writers operate under the concept that their audience is only half-watching anyway—Joss is one of the few who demands your full attention. I suspect folks who are used to only vaguely watching programs might find this irksome and decide the show is asking too much of them, that it’s not worth the effort. That’s one theory, anyway.

And of course, we must never forget the outside factors that helped reduce viewership: FOX’s gross mishandling, and several serious mistakes by Universal. And given the poor advertising for FF/S and the netlet status of the Buffyverse, it could be said that none of Joss’ work ever had an opportunity to appeal to a mass audience.

As for “Firefly,” it will of course keep pulling people in. I just made a few new converts last weekend; we’ll be having another Shindig this Saturday. Joss no doubt wants to return to it, but he also has plenty of stories to tell outside the ‘verse. Remember that besides Wonder Woman, there’s also Joss’ original movie Goners that he’s going to be making. We’ll see how things go a bit later—hopefully Joss’ style will impress the mass audience much better in the theater, paving the way for more successful work on the small screen—and perhaps a return to the ‘verse.

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 8:40 AM

MILFORD

I think you guys are on to something with the audince.

The show was character driven, and like another poster said quite well, they are PEOPLE, not characters. That's a departure from most television offerings. There were great plot-focused episodes like Ariel and Trash that I believe would have entertained the casual viewer, but with the mishandling of the show, there was never an opportunity to catch those television lurkers. While I grossly diagree with everything FOX

has done and ever will do in relation to this show, I think they might have had an idea when they asked for something more aciton related at the beginning of the season. I think the Pilot was essential, as many have pointed out. It lays the groundwork for the whole thing. But if they had followed that with more caper-centric episodes like Train Job or Ariel (this is hypothetical of course, there's not way to do that now, but at the beginning there was more flexibility) I think they would have been able to capture the attention of the average viewer.

Then, once the action and fun brign them in, you have the opportunity to focus more on character relationships with Out of Gas and Jaynestown.

Do I think Joss and Tim made any mistakes in the process? Absolutely not, they made one of the most sublime stories in recent TV history, not to mention enduring PEOPLE that we can identify with. But in terms of keeping the show on the air, I think these suggestions have merit.

That, and half of the world's TV viewing audience has had their minds labotomized by The Real World

, and a whole host of other crapola that prevents them from seeing genius in its true form. I can only be civil and have perspective for so long.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Customizeable handmade baby gifts personalized by my wife! Check them out at www.baby-bobo.com. All proceeds go towards international adoption.

Leaning into the wind that used to carry me-Stavesacre
That's why I don't kiss'em on the mouth- Jayne Cobb

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 9:00 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by StakeTheLurk:
I disagree that FF/S was “somewhat more serious” and “dealt with bigger issues”

I meant that FF was about adults in more realistic(!) life and death situations, no monsters or invisibility. And the issues were freedom and 'family' and government corruption.
You must admit that (on the surface at least) Buffy was basically a teen show. More fantastical might been a better way for me to phrase it.

Quote:

I’ve read elsewhere that most TV writers operate under the concept that their audience is only half-watching anyway—Joss is one of the few who demands your full attention. I suspect folks who are used to only vaguely watching programs might find this irksome and decide the show is asking too much of them, that it’s not worth the effort.

You nailed it, I think.

Somnambulist Chrisisall

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 9:05 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by milford:

That, and half of the world's TV viewing audience has had their minds labotomized by The Real World, and a whole host of other crapola that prevents them from seeing genius in its true form.

Huh?
I'm sorry, what did you say? I was watching a show about transvestite Scottish folk who like bowl on freeways during rush hour...

Head in the game Chrisisall

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 9:47 AM

MILFORD

Dang! I meant to tivo that so I wouldn't miss People Disagreeing About Common Things Overheatedly and then Having Sex Together and Then Hating Each Other Again, While Precariously Perched on the Eiffel Tower and Trying to Decide Who was Who's Father and Got the Million Dollars from the Doctor who was Really a Woman.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Customizeable handmade baby gifts personalized by my wife! Check them out at www.baby-bobo.com. All proceeds go towards international adoption.

Leaning into the wind that used to carry me-Stavesacre
That's why I don't kiss'em on the mouth- Jayne Cobb

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 10:04 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by milford:
People Disagreeing About Common Things Overheatedly and then Having Sex Together and Then Hating Each Other Again, While Precariously Perched on the Eiffel Tower and Trying to Decide Who was Who's Father and Got the Million Dollars from the Doctor who was Really a Woman.

Shoot! I really should check that one out. Fanty and Mingo go on and on about it.

Chrisisall, keepin' it real

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 11:32 AM

RMMC

Nuclearday,

Man, my experience wasn't too different from yours. I'd heard of the new series Joss was planning (which was what had stopped the proposed Giles spinoff from Buffy that would have been for the European market) and was interested since Joss was warning folks from the start that it was a space western (I know a lot of folks who ignored that bit...most were initially unhappy about the western portion, but after an episode or two, changed their minds...at least just for FF). I had no problem with that.
I really got happy when I found out that not only was Gina going to be in it (I saw her in HtLJ not C2525) but so was Ron Glass, whom I'd admired since the 70's.
Did Fox advertise it? Not that I saw. Actually the only bit of publicity I remember was an article in Starlog. 'Course this is the same network that didn't know what to do with Brisco, and marketed X-Files to look like it was a live-action 'Weekly World News.' (Which is why it took some friends forcing me to watch it, for me to discover it wasn't...I sure couldn't tell that by the commercials I saw while watching Brisco.)
I loved what I saw...when it was actually on. You do remember rightly. Fox moved the show so often, it could have qualified for frequent flier miles. I hadn't seen such a blantant display of a network wanting to kill one of its shows since CBS did that to WKRP

(They moved it...every week.)
I also side with the others here who partially blame the audiences as well. Too many folks don't want to have to actually (*gasp!*) THINK! IMHO our society has gotten too used to having others do many services for them: What to eat, who to vote for, what to think, what to wear. For them, if the herd likes it, it must be good. Go herd! Gak! So actually watching a program that not only makes them think...but make them think about Earth-that-is, well...many just can't cope.

Most popular TV shows are that way because they appeal to the lowest common demnominator. This is how networks work. They want MASS appeal. ('You want something intellectual? That's what PBS is for,' seems to be their viewpoint.

) Firefly, on the other hand, made assumptions that those watching actually had a few brain cells to rub together, hence, the smaller audience and the lack of enthusiam on the part of Fox. They wanted a quick cash-cow, not a long-term hit.
At least, that's been my take on it. YMMV.

****
RMMC

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

Thursday, April 6, 2006 3:06 PM

MILFORD

There's definitely something of the "herd" mentality there for sure, RMMC, you're right.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Customizeable handmade baby gifts personalized by my wife! Check them out at www.baby-bobo.com. All proceeds go towards international adoption.

Leaning into the wind that used to carry me-Stavesacre
That's why I don't kiss'em on the mouth- Jayne Cobb

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 7:39 AM

FOLLOWMAL

Has Stephen Spielberg joined the "herd mentality" folks?

I heard on CNN this morning that Spielberg is developing a "reality" show for FOX.

Something along the lines of "Idol" where directors compete to be recognized. There is going to be a panel of judges like on "Idol" with a Simon-type etc.

I don't have anymore details than that... was walking by the tv making breakfast to get folks out the door for work.. so my attention wasn't fully on it..

but c'mon... Spielberg?????!!!!!

The man has won Academy Awards, fer cryin' out loud!

" You hold. Hold til I get back." Mal

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:00 AM

IANW

I'm reading a lot of people responding that they regret not watching the show while it was on air.

We all agree that becuase this show was created differently than all other citcoms/reality/whatever right? My guess is that it probaly never would have taken off unless the fan base grew in the way it is now.

I remember watching some commentary to seinfeld season three- that's the season when the show started to get some major attention. I was 8 at the time so i don't remember it, but apparently it was just an average show untill that season and it exploded. The writers only made minor changes but yet, here they were, finnaly being reconized after three long years.

Now let's compare to firefly. Firefly has an evolving story line, hard to pickup from season two but not impossible. My point is, with releasing season 1, giving the audience time to digest it, spead through word of mouth, it will save some money and effort and release again when the time is right.

we all know that shows can come back to air, thanks to the family guy.

I bought the firefly season 3 weeks ago and I was surprised to find out that absolutely no one i know has a slight recolection of what the tv series or the movie exists.

I expect, liek me, with the movie reaching the people in a more efficient way, it will spread the word faster

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:09 AM

KINROEDARKSTONE

Quote:
Originally posted by ianw:

I bought the firefly season 3 weeks ago and I was surprised to find out that absolutely no one i know has a slight recolection of what the tv series or the movie exists.

Firefly season 3? I'm confused. What happened to season 2? Did I miss it again! Gorramit! j/k

Did you mean some other show?

--------------
Wash: Closing in.
Zoe: Planet's coming up a might fast.
Wash: That's just 'cause I'm goin' down too quick. Likely crash and kill us all.
Mal: Well, if that happens, let me know.

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:11 AM

NUCLEARDAY

Quote:
Originally posted by RMMC:
I really got happy when I found out that not only was Gina going to be in it (I saw her in HtLJ not C2525)

I'd totally forgot about Gina being in Hercules. Sorbo, man, Sorbo... (Come to think of it, wasn't there a love interest there between Gina's character and Hercules quirky blonde friend Iolus for a time? :)

Anyways, good to see I'm not the only one who had... troubles following Firefly's... creative scheduling.

Also, I think I agree with the many comments about the 'herd mentality' television seems to be aiming for. From what I've seen, the common factor among the 'coats is that we're not turned off by shows that don't talk down to us. Now, no intellectual am I, but I think I've seen enough of the same television shows over and over again that by the time Firefly came out, I was just about ready for something new. (And Sci-Fi AND Western? Those are my two favorite genres... that just went down like peanut butter and jelly to me :)

Maybe the public does just want different versions of the same old shows that have been around for eons. (Name me a sitcom, and I gaurantee there's an episode where the kid gets in trouble with a high-stakes card/pool/betting game and the 'uncool' dad has to step in and save the day :)

________________________________________________
You can take my hope when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:17 AM

IANW

sorry, i meant " I bout the firelyseason, 3 weeks ago"

damned comma

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:21 AM

SIMONB

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
I do think that Joss focusing on creating a quality show instead of the typical Hollywood eye candy is part of why it was not more popular. To me Firefly was visionary, ahead of it's time, and the american viewing public was not ready for it. Viewers today seem to be more interested in T&A, sex, violence, reality tv, and huge explosions then they are witty writing, great chemistry in the cast, relatively unknown actors/actresses, and sci fi.

I think the blending of the sci fi & western genres hurt us a bit too. I personally love westerns, but I am the minority these days. Westerns have been on the decline in popularity since the 70s and let's face it, if it is not Star Wars or Star Trek the general population is not really interested in sci fi. Add the two together & it will chase off all but the most open minded.

Sadly, gotta say you hit the nail on the head. I hardly ever watch anything on TV these days as there's so much rubbish on. I tend to get things on DVD and watch those instead. TV has become something to rot the brain, and what I loved about Firefly was it was clever, WELL WRITTEN and intelligent with a great cast. How often does that happen these days in the cheap and brainless world of reality TV, sex, violence and explosions, car chases and plots that let viewers turn their brains off and coast?

So many good (or promising) shows have been killed off early - Tru Calling, Harsh Realm, Futurama (coming back though, woo-hoo!!) to name but a few of them (and...hmm, all Fox Network....interesting) that I really do worry if there will be a place for good, well made shows any more.

Thankfully we still have Lost, 24, Stargate SG-1/Atlantis and BSG to prove that good shows (IMHO) sometimes make it. But Firefly more than deserves to still be there with them as it was SO VERY good and (IMHO) the best of them all.

- Shiny. Let's be bad guys.

That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 9:51 AM

FOLLOWMAL

Quote:
Originally posted by nuclearday:

(And Sci-Fi AND Western? Those are my two favorite genres... that just went down like peanut butter and jelly to me :)

Me too..

" You hold. Hold til I get back." Mal

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 4:57 PM

CATHERA

What's funny is I watched this show from the beginning and all the changes Fox made. I know I was disappointed when it went off the air.pissed: I never watched Buffy or Angel and had no idea who Joss was. I don't remember the advertising much but I love scifi stuff so I was in. I'm not a western fan and believe it or not I didn't realize it was until my husband pointed it out when we bought the DVD set and he watched it (for the first time). When Serenty came out I about died. I told him it was Firefly with a different name. I KNEW!!! it was the show. Fox is good at killing shows.

They didn't do much with Sliders, kept moving it's time and date around. I rented Sliders when it hit DVD and realized I never watch it after the first season, because it was moved around. They did the same thing with Fastlane. There are other shows too but I can't think of them right now. Fox really has no imagination. They used to be a good channel when they were new and now I don't watch it anymore (except for Family Guy so happy it returned). I really think if we did what FG fans did the show would return, even if it was on another station. I mean when FG was trying to come back it was a bidding war between Fox and Cartoon Network. Fox won because it realized what a mistake it made.
Firefly was a great show. Not like most of the crap on TV today. Surface and Lost are two that are close to Firefly in how they made you think and actually watch the show totally.
Ok I'm rambling now but I keep hoping for new Firefly episodes.

Under a Blag Flag We Shall Sail

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:33 PM

RMMC

Okay, I admit it. I watched Hercules. I do do brainless fluff...as long as it's fun brainless fluff.

Yeah, Gina's character (a Sumerian princess/pirate whose name is escaping me) actually married the little blonde guy (Iolaus). Then he got killed and had his body posessed by the Big Bad.

Fox's schedualing was so bad, I had to get copies of some eps from people on my Buffy list.

I think the herd mentality is drummed into us pretty young by a couple of ways one of which is peer pressure. As a kid you either go with the herd or get ostracized. (Guess which catagory I ended up in?

) Unfortunately many of those people never learned to break from the herd ie: think for themselves, because they still equate the self worth and place in society as being dependant on doing what everyone else does.

The other way the herding mentality gets drummed into people are their parents and teachers. Being told to 'not make waves,' 'why can't you be like so-and-so,' and having activities being dependant on popular opinion ('no, I'm sorry, we can't do X, because you were out-voted.') A lot of our society is actually geared towards the 'majority' ruling.

It took me some years to shake off a vast portion of the 'mass brainwashing' but I unfortunately still have it pop up and odd intervals. Unfortunately there are lots of people who either don't shake it off or don't want to.

Hey, I'm no brain trust here, beleieve me.

I just want to be treated like I actually have a working brain instead of a temporary sensory repository with a wallet.

Quote:
NUCLEARDAY said:
(And Sci-Fi AND Western? Those are my two favorite genres... that just went down like peanut butter and jelly to me :)

I felt much the same (I actually likened having spaceships in my western as haing chocolate topping on my sundae.

)

Sitcoms? Heck, I haven't watched any of those on a regular basis in 15 years or more. I can live with recycled plots, as long as the writing's good. I haven't seen a well-written sitcom in ages. I've finally just given up completely and stick with dramas and documentaries.

Geeze...recycled plots. I remember when the hollywood hack writers would come up with a plot and it would surface on every show on every network that season. Gads, was that ever sad.

****
RMMC

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

Friday, April 7, 2006 8:49 PM

RMMC

Quote:
Originally posted by FollowMal:

Has Stephen Spielberg joined the "herd mentality" folks?

I heard on CNN this morning that Spielberg is developing a "reality" show for FOX.

but c'mon... Spielberg?????!!!!!

The man has won Academy Awards, fer cryin' out loud!

I was kinda wondering about him after watching War of the Worlds this past year. That was a herd movie. I expected better from him and was vastly disappointed. It was too predictable (yeah, yeah its a remake, I know, but the tact he was trying to take should have been better) I spent too much time doing the same thing you do at 'b' monster movies, wondering how could someone be so dim as to do 'x' or not see 'y' coming.

WotW was not his best effort. Actually it didn't look like he put much effort into it at all, which was a pity because I think there was a really good movie in there somewhere wanting to get out.

It also makes me wonder if he's doing this stuff as a trade-off so he can do something else that he would put effort and talent into that he's afraid the GP may not go for.

Then again, it may just be that the money's nice. As I don't have much of that $$$) myself, I can't argue with if that's the reason. I'll just grouse.

BTW, FollowMal, I hear you are the person to see for one of those shiny browncoats. May I have one?

****
RMMC

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

Saturday, April 8, 2006 3:10 AM

FOLLOWMAL

I aree about War of the Worlds RMMC, and me not being a big fan of Tom C. didn't help either.
The movie had the same ho hum predictability that you never expect from Spielberg. Poor outing for him. Shades of things to come from him? Oh, dear, call Nathan stat to star in the next Indy movie, cuz I'm afraid for it now.

Well, maybe not go that far, although I'd sure be likely to watch it!

Yes, RMMC, you may have a shiny browncoat-

*shakes out and helps RMMC shrug into a new and shiny browncoat*

I am honored to give it to you.

Glad you're here with me holdin' til Mal gets back .... in a wonderful movie directed by a wonderful director who LOVES what he's doing.

" You hold. Hold til I get back." Mal

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

Saturday, April 8, 2006 7:33 PM

RMMC

Ah, Mr. Cruise...I was originally going to mention tha he's got all the acting abilities of wet belly button lint, but then decided against it.

I will however admit, this is probably the closest to acting he's ever likely to get.

It isn't the first time I've been disappointed by Mr Spielberg..that dishonour goes to Temple of Doom(ed). Talk about a pointless two hour commercial for computer games. That

movie is the reason I don't have Raiders or Last Crusade on DVD: I can't get them without also paying for that piece of gos se.

These reasons are why I have severe trepidation about the next Indy movie. Especially if Mrs. Spielberg is slated to be in it.

I'll probably go and see it, but at this point, I'm not expecting much.

Oooo....*takes coat happily* Thank you, FollowMal! *puts coat on* I will do my best as a browncoat to recruit others to our cause...and to enjoy watching our Captain in all his endeavors.

I'll definately hold until he (and the Evil Genius, Joss) get back.

****
RMMC

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

Sunday, April 9, 2006 3:38 PM

SEBA

I don't have time to re-read this entire thread, but simply put, Firefly wasn't popular because it wasn't given a chance, and also, because of poor marketing. Firefly was treated terribly by the network, and as such people who would have been incredibly interested in this sort of story (my fiancee and I included) were unaware of it. I think that is at least 70% of the issue here is that people just didn't know about it, and largely, that's still the problem.

My fiancee who watches television constantly and keeps up with absolutely everything interesting on TV ( and is a fan of Buffy/Angel ) didn't hear about it at all in 2002, and heard nothing until the film came out. This is seriously a huge deal. I don't know anyone who watches more TV than her. haha

As far as poor marketing, I think it largely is the fault of the show's originality -- the network/studio continues to try and market Firefly/Serenity in the context of existing scifi/action properties, instead of marketing it based on its own uniqueness and truly great qualities. Take the tagline for Serenity: "A passenger with a past, six rebels on the run, an empire in pursuit." I'm sorry, but this makes Serenity seem like a second-rate Star Wars, and we all know it isn't. Firefly should have been advertised as the truly great Dramatic Action Space Western Comedy Noir Romance that is is, the first truly realistic sci-fi, a character-driven, brilliantly written, serious and hillarious show about regular people trying to get by in a future world that doesn't disillusion itself with romantic notions of human nature.

Not to mention the innovative visual effects and camera work that make the viewer feal as if they are right there with the actors, viewing CG space-ships as if they were filmed on location with a hand-held camera, and the reality that THERE IS NO SOUND IN SPACE, and Firefly is STILL the only science fiction in film or television to actually get this right, furthur adding to the reality. And of course, there's the peerless fusion of musical styles that actually have a direct relationship to the fantasy of the story, making every situation seem all that more real, played with instruments that actually fit into the context of the show.

Yes, I'm preaching to the choir, but there has to be a better way to communicate the greatness of this program to more people, in a way above and beyond what Universal/Mutant Enemy/Fox has managed to come up with. It's a fantasy world that is more real than anything before it, something that everyone, everyone, can relate to, a "sci-fi" program that could EASILY move beyond the boundaries of its primary audience . And it was cancelled.

-- sigh --

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE