GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Newbie Question - Aliens?

POSTED BY: LEEE
UPDATED: Monday, June 20, 2005 18:21
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3288
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 4:58 AM

LEEE


Hi all,
I know there was a deliberate decision not to include aliens on the show (which is fine by me) but my question is do aliens actually exist in the story? I can't imagine travelling to all those worlds and not finding any other intelligent life.

Also, in Star Trek there is a defined amount of galaxy that has been explored, is there any mention in Firefly how far out they have gone into the galaxy (or universe)?

Thanks!

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 5:36 AM

RKLENSETH


Nope, no aliens at all. The closest thing to
aliens are the Reavers and they are at least partly human.

It was never actually said in the series how big the Firefy 'verse was but it is common belief that it is about the size of a galaxy. Perhaps these questions will be answered in the movie. I don't know, I haven't seen it yet.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 5:41 AM

BDJSB7


The movie does get into the logistics of the known 'verse. They do a good job summing up things in the first few minutes of the movie.

That is done through a narrative while showing CGI of things like colony ships leaving earth...

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 5:43 AM

FRAY101


Funnily enough I've just finished reading the essay in Finding Serenity (sorry, can't remember the author) who suggested that one of the reasons Firefly failed was because it was so far removed from the Star Trek concept we were so used to, ie where were the aliens?

Personally I like it just the way it is!

_____________________________________

Visit the Browncoats' Photo 'Verse at http://disneypix.tripod.com/photoverse or http://clik.to/photoverse

Over 100 Serenity screencaps now available at www.destinything.com.

www.cafepress.com/destinything and www.cafepress.com/ancientone

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 5:45 AM

GROUNDED


Quote:

Originally posted by rklenseth:
It was never actually said in the series how big the Firefy 'verse was but it is common belief that it is about the size of a galaxy.



I'm pretty sure Joss mentioned that he intended it as a single system in an interview. Can't remember where it was from, but if you did around for the 'Solar System vs. Galaxy' threads it'll be in there somewhere.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 6:03 AM

DAIKATH


SPOILERS!!!
Someone please edit it... even though it is the beginning I DONT want to know.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 6:06 AM

ZEEK


No aliens. Joss doesn't want them in the show. They don't exist in the Firefly verse. That's just the direction that Joss decided to go.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 6:13 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Quote:

Originally posted by BDJSB7:
The movie does get into the logistics of the known 'verse. They do a good job summing up things in the first few minutes of the movie.

That is done through a narrative while showing CGI of things like colony ships leaving earth...



I have not seen the movie, so I have no idea what it says, but as I recall the debate was never finished.

-

Some people, myself included, thought it was a single system.

The evidence to support this is that the central planets are always called the planets, yet they say “border moons” a lot. From what little we know of solar systems actual planets are nearer to the center, where father out, where the border would be, the bodies ripe for teraforming are moons, as the actual planets are gas giants.

Also there were only 70 something planets, which is entirely possible in a system with a large habitability zone and moon rich gas giants. The fact that we know they can change the gravity of a planet is a plus for this idea too.

Then there is the time it takes to get between the planets, just fine for a system if the ships are damn fast, but to be a whole galaxy they’d need to be more than damn fast, they’d need to be a lot faster than light. We are never given any indication they are, and several that they are not. (We can talk about that later, or never, either way is fine with me.)

Finally with the exception of mal people call it a system, always a system. While a galaxy is a type of system so is a city, and they don’t call those systems.

-

One of the primary arguments for it being a galaxy is Mal, he says it’s a whole new galaxy. Another is the time period, they say it is 500 years into the future and people just don’t feel like that is enough time to get to another system.

I never thought this made any sense, but then again I support the other side. I mean they can cryogenically suspend people in a small box, with industrial strength machines I’m sure they could do it longer. The logical thing in my mind is that sleeper ships were sent out. If there is no one who was awake to count the time asleep why record it again.

Imagine this:

You go to sleep on July third 2005 and wake up 6 thousand five hundred twenty years and four days later. The same with the rest of the world

Are you honestly going to tell everyone, “Ok, it’s not the fourth of July 2005, it’s the eighth of July 8525, from now on everyone has to remember that this is the date,”? If no one was awake any of the intervening days what is the point of changing the date at all? Isn’t it easier to just call it the fourth of July? Why confuse everyone.

In Firefly they weren’t on earth anymore anyway, the months are really vestigial anyway.

The final argument that I remember is being out of range, in Out of Gas they couldn’t contact anyone, they found a rout from one place to another where they would not be scanned or stopped or anything like that, I don’t understand how they wouldn’t be able to be out of range. I mean look at Jupiter, it’s got this huge red spot on it and you can’t see it with your naked eye. Your eye is a receiver, the image of the spot is a signal, but you can’t see the spot.

Wouldn’t the same be true of any other signal, to catch it either you need to be close or have a better reciver pointed right at it?

-

The last argument is BS, for a while people were saying that you couldn’t have 70 worlds in one system, it simply isn’t true. It is true that it would be hard to find a system like that, but what kind of idiot doesn’t look for a good system, yet is still intelligent enough to go to new planets, teraforms them, and create civilization?

In sci fi the question is always what is possible, it is possible to have it be in one system, though in real life such a system might not exist. Anyone who says it is not possible is trying to trick you, though I can’t imagine why they would care enough to do so.

-

-

Regardless, that is the debate, It was never finished, apparently it is cleared up in the movie, and perhaps someone from the other side would like to defend their side.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 6:15 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Quote:

Originally posted by Grounded:
Quote:

Originally posted by rklenseth:
It was never actually said in the series how big the Firefy 'verse was but it is common belief that it is about the size of a galaxy.



I'm pretty sure Joss mentioned that he intended it as a single system in an interview. Can't remember where it was from, but if you did around for the 'Solar System vs. Galaxy' threads it'll be in there somewhere.



Oh yeah, Joss did come out and say there was no faster than light travel, so it would have to be a single system.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 7:37 AM

LEEE


Quote:

Originally posted by fray101:
Funnily enough I've just finished reading the essay in Finding Serenity (sorry, can't remember the author) who suggested that one of the reasons Firefly failed was because it was so far removed from the Star Trek concept we were so used to, ie where were the aliens?

Personally I like it just the way it is!



So far it hasn't bothered me that there are no aliens, you don't really need them in this show. But perhaps if we were in to season 5 or 6, maybe it would begin to get noticible and seem like a gap needing to be filled.

So from what I understand from the conversation in this thread. The Firefly 'verse is probably just ONE system of planets revolving around ONE star? It would seem it would have to be if they don't have faster than light travel?

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 8:01 AM

GUNRUNNER


Quote:

Originally posted by Leee:
So from what I understand from the conversation in this thread. The Firefly 'verse is probably just ONE system of planets revolving around ONE star? It would seem it would have to be if they don't have faster than light travel?



Lots of star systems have more than one star. The closest system to ours Alpha Centauri (AKA Rigil Kentaurus) has three Alpha, Beta, and Proxima Centauri. Centauri A is a G2 type star (Similar to our sun) Centauri B is a K1 (Yellow-Orange), Proxima is a Red Dwarf.

EV Nova Firefly mod Message Board:
http://s4.invisionfree.com/GunRunner/index.php?act=idx
Assorted Firefly Goodies: http://utnhq.com/TLAM_Strike/gunrunner.htm
My Other Site:
http://www.utnhq.com/TLAM_Strike/index.htm

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 8:23 AM

SPQR


there are 28 planets/moons talked about in FireFly. Half way down the page is a list of names of the FireFly moons & planets.

http://www.browncoats.com/main.php?parent=3e546fa726367&line=

I think that it is about 3-4 total solar systems & expanding, but unsure if that incluedes this solar system.

New planet found out side this one & it is 'like earth'

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/06/13/extrasolar.planet/index.html

Nasa link, names & distances of closest solar systems.

http://apod.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap010318.html





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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 8:37 AM

SPIKEANDJEZEBEL


SPOILER BELOW FOR THE MOVIE:

Select to view spoiler:


The movie definitively answers the question - it is a single system, with many planets and moons that have been terraformed. Also, Joss has stated in interviews in the past that there were to be no aliens in Firefly/Serenity - they do not exist in the universe of the series.



"I like smackin' 'em!" - Jayne Cobb

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 10:24 AM

CHANNAIN

i DO aim to misbehave


Quote:

Daikath wrote:
SPOILERS!!!
Someone please edit it... even though it is the beginning I DONT want to know.

I'm curious as to what Daikath thinks was spoiled exactly from such a vague description about the beginning. And if he/she was so worried about spoilage, why re-post the quote?

However, Leee, if you feel you should warn some folks that there are possible spoilers about the movie, you can go in and add a line to your initial post, letting folks know there may be possible spoilers.

I know...

I draw...therefore I am. http://www.mnartists.org/Nora_Leverson
Live in Minnesota? Join the Group! Yahoo Group, that is...
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/MN-Firefly

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:27 AM

DAIKATH


Adding the quote wasnt the smartest thing to do, I agree.

But im just really frantic about spoilers, I havent even watched the trailer for what little it might give me. I want to be a total blank slate, completely when I see the movie.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:33 AM

LEEE


It would be an interesting back-story to find out how far away the system is from the Earth That Was, how long it took to get an entire population there, and how it was done?

I know it's really not important to the story that Joss wants to tell, but some people like me just HAVE to know everything!

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 12:04 PM

CALHOUN


Quote:

christhecynic wrote:
Tuesday, June 14, 2005 06:15

Oh yeah, Joss did come out and say there was no faster than light travel, so it would have to be a single system.



Not necessarily. There could be wormhole travel or some mechanism whereby they fold space. Not likely in the Firefly verse.

Point I am making is that travel over interstellar distances without FTL is still conceivable.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 12:18 PM

DAIKATH


But right after Joss said that (in the same answer) he also said sci-fi questions made him cry.

So I dont think he had to be serious so this entire thing is still open for debate.

But still, being as isolated as they were in Out of Gas would seem pretty hard to do in a single solar system, as we can monitor plenty of stuff in our current solar system now wich cant be seen with our bare eyes.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 1:12 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Leee:
Hi all,
I know there was a deliberate decision not to include aliens on the show (which is fine by me) but my question is do aliens actually exist in the story? I can't imagine travelling to all those worlds and not finding any other intelligent life.

Also, in Star Trek there is a defined amount of galaxy that has been explored, is there any mention in Firefly how far out they have gone into the galaxy (or universe)?

Thanks!



I think the key is intelligent life. Sure, where life COULD exist, simple forms of some sort might have been found. Those familiar w/ the Drake Equation on the rariety of Intelligence beyond our planet might appreciate Joss's choice. In just our own Galaxy, the number of such planets would be in the 10,000's. Yet because of the vastness of time/space, we might never 'bump' into them...save for one finding the ancient remains of the other's relics.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 1:27 PM

BIKISDAD


That's so true. Intelligent life forms on other planets may be separated by not only great distances, but also by long periods of time. Good point.

Apathy on the Rise. No One Cares.

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 2:45 PM

EVERYWORLDSPINNIN


Quote:

Originally posted by spqr:
there are 28 planets/moons talked about in FireFly. Half way down the page is a list of names of the FireFly moons & planets.



Yes, the key word here is moons. It IS altogether possible to have 70 "Earths" in relative close proximity when you consider teraforming moons, not just planets. The new discovery today is a mere 15 light years away. Plenty of time to get there in 500 years.

"I wanna cast...Magic Missile."
http://www.ifilm.com/filmdetail?ifilmid=220487

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

Tuesday, June 14, 2005 2:53 PM

CALHOUN


Quote:

everyworldspinnin wrote:
Tuesday, June 14, 2005 14:45

The new discovery today is a mere 15 light years away. Plenty of time to get there in 500 years.



Proxima Centauri is only 4.2 light years away

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 3:03 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Quote:

Originally posted by Daikath:
But right after Joss said that (in the same answer) he also said sci-fi questions made him cry.

So I dont think he had to be serious so this entire thing is still open for debate.


It’s quite simple really, Joss is god.

That’s what creating a world means, it doesn’t matter if it is a TV show or a novel, the creator is god because the creator can smite anyone with the swish of a pen, undo any event with a revision, and lay entire worlds to waste with a tiny bit of exposition.

When god says the world is round the world is round, it doesn’t matter if he says that geographical questions make him cry in the next sentence.

Still the matter is always open for debate, all matters are, but is that pretty much as solid as you will ever get.

(Of course he could change his mind. In a work of fiction the history and composition of the whole universe teeters on the brink of revision)

Quote:

But still, being as isolated as they were in Out of Gas would seem pretty hard to do in a single solar system, as we can monitor plenty of stuff in our current solar system now wich cant be seen with our bare eyes.

You clearly see the world in a different way than me.

(Random Note: the word “than” is currently subject to debate, scholars disagree on whether it is a preposition or a conjunction. If you say, “than I,” you are being a bit crude because you assume that the verb is implied. To be proper you should say, “than I do.” On the other hand if you say, “than me,” you are being proper provided than, a word of relation, is a preposition.

It is all so much clearer in Latin.)

My whole point was exactly what you said. We can see a lot more in our solar system than is visible with the naked eye. The eye is a receiver of transmissions made of light, a telescope is a way to augment that receiver. But if you can see the great red spot you can’t see Mars. The better, farther, and more detail you can see in the less your field of view.

If you stand on the top of my house you can see 360 degrees horizontally and 180 degrees vertically, making a hemisphere off to infinity. Because of the radius of the earth and the height of geosynchronous satellites that means that I have line of sight to 46% of the geosynchronous altitude.

Of course such satellites are not evenly spread, so it could be I have fewer (or more) satellites in my line of sight than that implies.

The point remains the same though. The dish I have set up can only receive from one of them. Out of all of the satellites I have line of sight to I only have one I can get. The reason is obvious, the dish is a parabolic collector with the receiver set up at the focus. It can only see one of the satellites because if it didn’t have that collector it wouldn’t be able to receive a signal (even though it is so close to us.)

With the collector what it has line of sight to is very limited.

-

Is it so hard to believe that in a system with that many planets there could be some places that no directional receivers are pointed at and no non-directional ones are close enough to?

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 4:19 AM

RKLENSETH


Quote:

Originally posted by Daikath:
SPOILERS!!!
Someone please edit it... even though it is the beginning I DONT want to know.




There aren't any spoilers here...unless you haven't watched all of Firefly yet.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 5:21 AM

ZOID


christhecynic:

If I might pose an aviation analogy: All aircraft are equipped with ELT (Emergency Locator Transmitters). In case of a distress situation, the pilot may activate the ELT which sends out a powerful omnidirectional signal on frequencies 121.5 (VHF) and 243.0 (UHF), which are the dedicated emergency or 'guard' freqs, world-wide. In case of crash, the ELT automatically triggers.

The only limitations to receiving these radio transmissions is 'line-of-sight' -- meaning the curvature of the Earth -- the strength of the transmitter and sensitivity of the receiver, and the speed of light -- because 'radio' is just a different spectrum of electromagnetic (EM) wave -- and that 'speed' is negligible between earthly distances. When I was a boy, my father was a CB (citizens' band) radio enthusiast and had sets for the car, truck and a base station for our den. One day his car's radio was destroyed by an illegally strong radio signal, which fried his receiver and antenna. Basically, the other CB'er was right next to him, keyed up his mike and zap! In a related way, an F-15's forward radar is so powerful it can fry an enemy aircraft's electronics on a close pass. (NB: In one case I know of personally, an F-15's forward radar killed a mainainer when it was accidentally triggered while he stood in front of the plane.) Another example closer to home: Never use a microwave oven to dry off your miniature poodle; you already know why. Microwaves are another form of EM.

While that may have seemed like an unnecessary digression, my point is that Serenity's transmitter must be limited in power and/or beam focus in order to avoid frying electronics every time it comes in close proximity to other craft or makes a planetary landing. It is possible that when they were flying 'under the radar' in OoG, they were outside normal shipping lanes where tightbeam relay transceivers might be placed at regular intervals. Without these relays, a ship's regulation-strength transmitter might not be strong enough to be received beyond a certain distance by standard radio receivers. Please also note that Mal prompted Wash to divert ship power to Serenity's 'ELT', which would cause problems for any passing ship's nav and comm electronics.

As a last consideration on the topic of being outside radio reception within a single system: Light from our Sun takes 7 minutes to reach us. When our star goes nova, we will be doomed for 7 minutes before the hammer actually falls. If I remember correctly, radio transmissions from Voyager were taking over an hour to reach high-sensitivity, precisely-aimed receivers in earth orbit when it was in the vicinity of Neptune (I could look it up, but I'm lazier than you might suspect). So, 'speed of light' at interplanetary distances does play a role in Firefly's situation. If the 'outer moons' were situated in a region analogous to Sol's Kuiper Belt (or farther), it could literally take hours -- even with relay transmitter signal strengths -- to reach a Core listening post. Therefore, the crew would have perished of freezing (per River) before they could be rescued.


Radiographically,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"Sure as I know anything, I know this: I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDM'

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 5:58 AM

ZOID


Leee:

Why the need for aliens? Most scientific commentators conclude that we would probably have a very hard time trying to interact with an alien species, in the unlikely event we ever found one. The chances of finding a humanoid alien lifeform, similar to Klingons or Vulcans, are astronomically remote at best. (So much for having a green girl in every port, Captain Kirk.)

In any case, the sole reason for having them on Star Trek (or even in the movies "Alien", "The Thing" or "Predator" for example), is to point out a side of human nature in a 'sneaky' way. We recognize their behavior in humanity, and it helps us explore a facet of human behavior, good or ill, without feeling like the author is picking on a particular group of humans specifically. So, why even have 'em, when we could just be honest and grown-up enough to explore human behaviors within actual human characters?

That's why I deeply admire Joss Whedon and his Firefly. That's also part of the reason I'm not so keen on his Buffy and Angel (gothic creatures/villains are the literary precursor of sci-fi aliens). The beauty of Firefly is that it doesn't shroud human foibles in latex prosthetic devices...


Recognizably,

zoid

P.S.
...At least not until we get into the Reavers' story, sometime later this year. Hopefully, they'll make some kind of sense, beyond simply being a cipher for some otherwise recognizable group of humans (i.e., Amerind 'heathens', Arab 'terrorists', Midwestern 'separatists', etc.).

P.P.S.
Science fiction's greatest epic, "Dune", also had no intelligent alien life forms. No one -- including the author -- has ever attributed intelligence to Shai Hulud. All the characters are humans or mutations thereof. I'll go out on a limb and say that Dune (the book) is better realized (as a work of fiction) than Star Wars and Star Trek combined.
_________________________________________________

"Sure as I know anything, I know this: I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDM'

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 6:51 AM

LEEE


Well as I said, I really don't miss aliens in Firefly, don't need 'em.

And you're right, I keep forgetting that all aliens don't speak english (even without a universal translator)

And how come Klingons and Romulans always have the courtesy (most of the time) to speak in english when humans are aboard their ship. You would never hear the crew of the Enterprise speaking Klingonese to make their guests feel more at home.

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 7:03 AM

TALLGRRL


Quote:

Originally posted by Leee:
Hi all,
I know there was a deliberate decision not to include aliens on the show (which is fine by me) but my question is do aliens actually exist in the story? I can't imagine travelling to all those worlds and not finding any other intelligent life.

Also, in Star Trek there is a defined amount of galaxy that has been explored, is there any mention in Firefly how far out they have gone into the galaxy (or universe)?

Thanks!



Firefly seems to only deal with the planets in the 'verse that have been Terra-formed.
The process of Terra-forming would kill any pre-existing lifeforms on a planet.
There are only "humans" (Terrans)who's origins are from Earth living on these planets.
Therefore...No. There are no actual "aliens". (Though technically the colonizers of these planets are aliens.)
And there is no Mission.
No "...seek[ing] out new worlds...boldly go[ing] where no one has gone before." (I love Star Trek, by the way.)
Just finding the next job and getting paid.

Oh, and steering clear o' Reavers.


"Take me, sir. Take me hard." -- Zoe

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 8:09 AM

THATWEIRDGIRL


What Zoid said!


It disturbs me how many times I've read those six books. I've always loved the lack of aliens. Herbert let humans be the ghastly creatures they are. Joss is now following in that tradition. As much as I adore Ferengis et al, I prefer seeing man struggle with the man inside. All in all, much more satisfying.

Quote:

Originally posted by zoid:
P.P.S.
Science fiction's greatest epic, "Dune", also had no intelligent alien life forms. No one -- including the author -- has ever attributed intelligence to Shai Hulud. All the characters are humans or mutations thereof. I'll go out on a limb and say that Dune (the book) is better realized (as a work of fiction) than Star Wars and Star Trek combined.



www.thatweirdgirl.com
---
Res melius evinissent cum pepsimilk!

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 11:46 AM

YT

the movie is not the Series. Only the facts have been changed, to irritate the innocent; the names of the actors and characters remain the same


Quote:

Originally posted by zoid:
I'll go out on a limb


Looks as solid as the Rock of Gibraltar from here. Good to see you back, zed.

Keep the Shiny Side Up . . . (wutzon) Gene Chandler, "Duke of Earl", 45

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

Friday, June 17, 2005 7:44 PM

ZOID


YT wrote:
Quote:

...Good to see you back, zed.

'Hi', back atcha! Good to see something other than preview tickets/scalping threads on which to comment. I didn't go anywhere; I just didn't have anything to add to that topic, and it appeared to be the only one anyone was interested in. I did try to start a thread on how I thought BlueSun might be the vestiges of today's Japanese manufacturers. It got exactly zero responses.

Thank God/Mother Earth/The Ineffable Nothingness/The Sciences (i.e. whatever folks might be worshipping these days) for newbies and their questions. Never thought you'd hear that, did ya'?

On a side note, one poster above (I'm not gonna single him/her out) begged to be kept spoiler free on the movie, claiming to not even have watched the trailer in that pursuit. Isn't this getting a little obsessive/compulsive, like excessive habitual hand washing? If one really wishes to remain totally free of even a hint which might point to a clue about a spoiler, shouldn't one simply avoid Whedon-based sites altogether? It hardly seems fair to accuse others of spoiling when all they are doing is engaging in mutual-consent discourse.

I'm fairly certain that we could know the entire plot before walking in the theatre and still get the bejeezus shocked out of us. "Subtle is the Lord", and so is Joss. And just because folks see something in a preview screener doesn't necessarily mean it's gonna be that way in the final release. Ever wonder why these preview screenings continue to be the "unfinished" version, for lo, these past two months? Surely, they must be very nearly finished with the color timings and FX by now. Could it be that the entire theatrical-release movie is finished, but with different scenes/ending than is being trotted out at previews?

Maybe what everyone is currently seeing at previews is going to wind up on the "Deleted Scenes" feature on disc 2 of the DVD set. Now that would be a misdirection ploy worthy of Joss Whedon, the ultimate spoilerphobe...


Respectfully,

zoid
_________________________________________________

"Sure as I know anything, I know this: I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDM'

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

Saturday, June 18, 2005 9:48 AM

YT

the movie is not the Series. Only the facts have been changed, to irritate the innocent; the names of the actors and characters remain the same


Quote:

Originally posted by zoid:
I did try to start a thread on how I thought BlueSun might be the vestiges of today's Japanese manufacturers. It got exactly zero responses.


I read that thread within a few hours of you posting it. It seemed well reasoned but, @the time, all I could think to say was "I doubt it", which falls just shy of my standards for constructive criticism. I was surprised that it disappeared without comment. It may have suffered from an unfortunate, & little mentioned, artifact of the screenings (& tickets) buzz, to whit: General Discussions threads are archived in little over a day -- for a while, when you started that thread, it was less than a day.

Quote:

Thank God/Mother Earth/The Ineffable Nothingness/The Sciences (i.e. whatever folks might be worshipping these days) for newbies and their questions. Never thought you'd hear that, did ya'?

I certainly think I will never hear the opposite from you, though others less courtly have expressed said opposing sentiment. Which makes this a subject worthy of its own thread.

Quote:

On a side note, one poster above (I'm not gonna single him/her out) begged to be kept spoiler free on the movie, claiming to not even have watched the trailer in that pursuit. Isn't this getting a little obsessive/compulsive, like excessive habitual hand washing?

While it could be argued that I'm in a great position to know one, I see nothing wrong with wishing to keep one's hands clean.

Returning to your opening point, what ticks me off about this request is that before the trailer (before hint of the screenings) I started a thread suggesting we needed a new forum for the BDM. It got a few posts in 36 hours, including one from Haken saying he'd add another forum if it seemed wanted. For the next month, whenever someone complained about unlabeled spoilers, I posted a link to that thread. Nobody has supported it. http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=9371

Quote:

Maybe what everyone is currently seeing at previews is going to wind up on the "Deleted Scenes" feature on disc 2 of the DVD set. Now that would be a misdirection ploy worthy of Joss Whedon, the ultimate spoilerphobe...


Sounds like a fun flight, but not without a reliable oxygen supply. Bon voyage

Keep the Shiny Side Up . . . (wutzon) Rob Beaulieu & Raisinhead, "Rock Cut Road", from "Back to the Tracks"

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

Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:21 AM

THEREALME


Hi. I mistakenly posted this under a different thread (Firefly Engineering 101 or something). However, I believe that it should have been here. My apologies, but I'll just repost those thoughts:

------

I am a proponent of the Multiple Systems Theory. This is mostly because of “Out of Gas,” where “past” Mal tells Zoe that with the ship, no matter how long the arm of the Alliance got, they could go just a little farther. This could never be true in a single system. You would run out of habitable zone or habitable planets (even terraformed ones).

You would in a galaxy, too, if you want to be technical about it, but I suspect Mal and Zoe would not live long enough to run out of places to go in a galaxy.

Anyway…

I think the true answer(s) cannot be determined. In the related questions of “Faster Than Light travel or not?” and “Multiple star systems or one?”, I remain convinced that Joss doesn’t understand or care.

When asked in an interview if there was FTL travel in the Firefly universe, he didn’t say, “No”. He said, “I don’t think so.” Then he went on to say he’d cry if asked any more science questions.

I remain convinced that Joss doesn’t really understand the differences between outer space, a star system, a group of star systems, a galaxy, and a universe. I think it is all “outer space” to him. Sort of like how some un-informed folks might think that the Pharoah Rameses the Great, Alexander the Great, and Julius Caeser were all more or less contemporaries of each other (they weren't, not by hundreds of years).

I could believe that this misunderstanding in spatial scale could lead to “no FTL travel” coupled with “travel between several star systems in weeks” (which is CLEARLY impossible).

Yes, travel at the speed of plot.

If I’m right, then Joss, the only person with the authority to answer the “FTL” and “multi vs one system” questions, is simply not qualified to do so, nor has any interest in doing so.

And if these questions are NOT answered, then you could have various writers for the series assuming one or the other position and dropping clues that point both ways.

It’s sad, really, to leave such a hole in an otherwise great background.

Some would tell me that these details don’t matter, that it’s all about the characters. This is true to a point, but I find such errors as glaring as if the crew section was on the upper level one week and the lower level the next. Or if the Serenity was armed with lasers one week and not the next. It is a matter of getting the show’s continuity down.

Of course, I’ll love Firefly no matter what. I just wish they’d thought a bit more about the science aspects, too.

Maybe the movie will answer this question. I’ll know this coming week.


The Real Me, First Officer of the Sereni-Tree

(The Real Me cannot currently receive messages from this site; he is not ignoring you. But he CAN receive e-mail at realme@pcibroadband.net.)

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

Saturday, June 18, 2005 9:25 PM

ZOID


TRM:

I believe you will get your answer to this and many other perennial questions at the screening. I just hope you don't get maudlin over the death of a pet theory or three. It's Joss after all: He likes killing the things we love, just because he can.

And I can't seriously believe you insulted Joss' intelligence. I mean, in one sentence you accused him of not doing his homework when setting up the premise of the 'verse, and in the next you compared him to "other people". If I were you, I'd steer clear of electrical storms...


Deiphobically,

zoid

P.S.
There isn't anything that happens in the show that can't logically happen within one system. I reckon it could even be Sol system. Given the power to harness gravity and rapidly terraform a planetary body (meaning less than 50,000 years), there are easily 30 terraformable bodies in orbit around our own star (including the moons of the 'gas giants'). Ergo, Ockham's Razor favors 'single system', because it's the simplest answer that fits the evidence (Mal's Southern-style, exaggerated figures of speech notwithstanding). The only way 'galaxy' fits at all is if you factor in JW being an idiot -- which you apparently have -- but I sure ain't going to. I think he knows more than you've given him credit for, and was meticulous in his research. The 'verse makes sense. Joss knows his sh!t, he just doesn't care for ubergeeky questions. Ever seen "Galaxy Quest"? 'Galaxy' proponents seem to be suffering from 'residual Star Trek syndrome'. Why does a sci-fi story have to span a whole galaxy, filled with bipedal humanoid aliens (with large breasts) in order to be satisfying?
_________________________________________________

"Sure as I know anything, I know this: I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDM'

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

Monday, June 20, 2005 4:49 PM

YT

the movie is not the Series. Only the facts have been changed, to irritate the innocent; the names of the actors and characters remain the same


Quote:

Originally posted by TheRealMe:
Yes, travel at the speed of plot.

If I’m right, then Joss, the only person with the authority to answer the “FTL” and “multi vs one system” questions, is simply not qualified to do so, nor has any interest in doing so.

And if these questions are NOT answered, then you could have various writers for the series assuming one or the other position and dropping clues that point both ways.

It’s sad, really, to leave such a hole in an otherwise great background.


This is one of those rare instances where I find myself disagreeing with zoid.

Joss cannot abdicate answering these questions in favour of Tim Minear; I'm not sure Tim understands the difference between physics & psychics. Joss has given no indication that he realizes different answers to these questions lead to different stories, which has the potential to be a bigger problem than contradictory clues.

And in Outa Gas, widely heralded as the best Firefly ep (which would have to make it the best ep of an American series in this millennium, n'est ce pas?), Serenity was travelling @the speed of plot.

Keep the Shiny Side Up . . . (wutzon) Dave Mathews Band, "Dream Girl", from "Stand Up"

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

Monday, June 20, 2005 6:21 PM

THEREALME


Zoid,

I have the greatest respect for his work. Joss is without a doubt a brilliant writer and director.

But a scientist, apparently not so much.

He offers to cry when asked a question about how his universe is put together? He says, "I don't think so" when asked the FTL question.

Sorry, Zoid. If he did the meticulous research as you suggest, then he would have an answer.

Joss doesn't know for sure, and possibly doesn't care. Or else he does know and he is messing with us, which means he is insulting us.

And I have no religious attachement to the Multiple Systems theory. It is just that I can't believe Mals "We'll go farther" talk in a single system. Aliens don't exist? If they have only explored one or two system, why do they think so? Mal talked about a whole galaxy full of worlds. Why not a whole system full of worlds?

You are right. There is no hard evidence that it is set in multiple systems (just the clues above). But I don't see hard evidence that it is set in a single system.

I hope the movie resolves it. I'll take either answer.




The Real Me, First Officer of the Sereni-Tree

(The Real Me cannot currently receive messages from this site; he is not ignoring you. But he CAN receive e-mail at realme@pcibroadband.net.)

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

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL