Firefly, already "iffy"? by millernate

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Firefly, already "iffy"?

POSTED BY: MILLERNATE
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 04:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2501
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, August 19, 2002 12:08 PM

Well this isn't exactly a pleasant article but it does play in with a Usenet "conversation" that I've had with someone where they claim that Firefly was treated "like a mid-season replacement, which it almost was" (considering that it only got 13 episodes where as producers that the network really want to work with get better deals, like Chris Carter getting 24 eps for Millenium). The San Jose Mercury News wrote an article on "8 series under scrutiny" and didn't seem to be all that positive about Firefly, feel free to read it at http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/3844152.htm and don't worry, there aren't any spoilers.

Nathan
"Being popular and well liked is not in your best interest. Let me be more clear; if you behave in a manner pleasing to most, then you are probably doing something wrong." - Janeane Garofalo, from "Feel this Book"

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

Monday, August 19, 2002 12:32 PM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.

Depending on how one looks at it, 13 high quality episodes are better than 22 mediocre ones. The original pilot cost between 8 to 10 million to make (that's like 5 episodes of Enterprise and perhaps 10 episodes of any other series), with a large percentage of the budget going to the construction of sets and the likes--all the stuff that goes into starting up a series from scratch.

Now, depending on how much each subsequent episodes cost to produce, an entire 13 episode season of Firefly may well cost the same as 22 episodes of another series to produce. I wish I had some solid figures, but I don't.

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

Monday, August 19, 2002 12:38 PM

NOVAGRASS

In an attempt to justify this prognosis, it seems as though this article is all speculation on the part of the writer. Yes, we all know the terms on which Firefly is being premiered, and this article adds no new information (and even ignores some information already made available) to convince us that Firefly is in any worse position than we have already predicted.

They also seem to underestimate sci-fi fans' ability to try new things. To say that Firefly has less of a chance of appealing to them is quite presumptuous, indeed. If anything, it will appeal to a more mainstream audience due to the lack of "phasers and aliens."

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

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

Monday, August 19, 2002 1:55 PM

ZICSOFT

I'll say it again. I'm Mister Cynical, especially when it comes to TV. But, barring some big screwup, like changing the schedule every week, I'm getting more and more convinced that Firefly will do very well. There's just isn't any serious competition. I don't just mean, "in the same time slot". I mean period. People need more engagement and thoughtfulness than they're getting, or else they'll go off and surf the internet.

There is a downside. If the show is at all successful, every other network will start working on a lame ripoff. Small price to pay, I guess.

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

Monday, August 19, 2002 4:44 PM

MOJOECA

Quote:
Originally posted by millernate:
Well this isn't exactly a pleasant article but it does play in with a Usenet "conversation" that I've had with someone where they claim that Firefly was treated "like a mid-season replacement, which it almost was" (considering that it only got 13 episodes where as producers that the network really want to work with get better deals, like Chris Carter getting 24 eps for Millenium).

FOX ordered 13 eps of FIREFLY "sight unseen". That is *beyond* normal procedure, which is to make that decision after a pilot is produced. When the show premieres, if the ratings are there, FOX will then order the full season. Standard practice. And many shows (mostly sitcoms) only get 6 episode orders. So fact is, FIREFLY *was* treated better than a midseason throwaway. The cost of the pilot should indicate that much.

I hadn't known that Carter got a full season order of MILLENIUM outright (if that is what you mean). That is *very*, *very* rare. But at the time, he was hot on XF success. Joss hasn't created a major network hit; he has two cult shows on fledgling nets. FOX, understandably, isn't so sure that he can deliver an adequate X-FILES replacement (the initial plan). And on fridays, the show needs to draw (probably more than) the combined audience of both BUFFY and ANGEL.

I'll also note that Carter, after the lacklaster ratings for MILLENNIUM and DOA HARSH REALM, isn't so hot anymore. I doubt he got a full season order for that XF nerd trio spinoff (blank on the title), which was canceled before midseason, IIRC.

So tell that guy on Usenet he needs to get his fact straight.

--- Joe

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

Tuesday, August 20, 2002 5:18 AM

ZICSOFT

Besides which, they've spent a lot of money on startup. Those fancy sets, basic effects and other graphics, publicity, etc. Not to mention initial payments to Whedon himself, who does not work cheap. They're not going to walk away from that unless the show totally tanks.

Which it will not do. This is a guy who made a success out of a show with a silly premise and a sillier title, that he himself did not see lasting a full season, never mind 6 1/2. Imagine how people will react to a show by the same guy, only with a "serious" premise.

Ignorant, pretentious pundits are such a bore.

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

Tuesday, August 20, 2002 7:47 AM

SHUGGIE

Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
They also seem to underestimate sci-fi fans' ability to try new things. To say that Firefly has less of a chance of appealing to them is quite presumptuous, indeed. If anything, it will appeal to a more mainstream audience due to the lack of "phasers and aliens."

Couldn't agree more. There are a lot of people out there who either don't take SF as a whole seriously because of the image of "guys in latex suits" or those who don't take TV/Film SF seriously for the same reason.

My only concern is that it gets enough of an audience quickly enough. Buffy was kind of a "slow burn" effect with a lot of word of mouth gradually getting out there. I hope Fox promote Firefly heavily.

Shug

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

Tuesday, August 20, 2002 8:02 AM

NOVAGRASS

Here's another article from the Mercury News... this time about Joss Whedon in general. It's pretty positive and very spoiler-free.

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/bayarea/entertainment/columnists/charlie_mc
collum/3889342.htm

--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--

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

Tuesday, August 20, 2002 11:43 AM

CHARLIEBLUE

Quote:
Originally posted by Shuggie:
I hope Fox promote Firefly heavily.

Not only that, I hope they promote it better. My mom saw one of the commercials the other day, and she turns to me and says something along the lines of "That's Firefly? Wow. It looks bad."

And without having seen it, it does look like Fox is trying to promote the show more as they want to see it than how Joss is actually making it. His shows tend to be kind of intelligent, and those ads...don't really look it. Though I do have to admit the "girl in a box" bit made me chuckle.

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

Wednesday, August 21, 2002 4:57 AM

ZICSOFT

Quote:
Originally posted by CharlieBlue:
Quote:
Originally posted by Shuggie:
I hope Fox promote Firefly heavily.

Not only that, I hope they promote it better. My mom saw one of the commercials the other day, and she turns to me and says something along the lines of "That's Firefly? Wow. It looks bad."

And without having seen it, it does look like Fox is trying to promote the show more as they want to see it than how Joss is actually making it. His shows tend to be kind of intelligent, and those ads...don't really look it. Though I do have to admit the "girl in a box" bit made me chuckle.

I totally agree with your mom. But most TV promos are thoroughly misleading -- especially for the good shows. Good shows are cliche-free, and PR types just don't understand that kind of thinking.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE