GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Why is Firefly a 'Hard Sell'?

POSTED BY: SERGEANTX
UPDATED: Saturday, October 4, 2003 12:04
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7158
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, January 2, 2003 3:56 PM

SERGEANTX


I first heard about Firefly on slashdot.org. I remember, that while the article was positive, a majority of the follow up posts were critizing the concept and obviously not pre-sold fans. Their comments, and most of the negative comments I've seen since about Firefly, had a consistent thread. Most of them were really just saying that Firefly wasn't what they expected, therefore they didn't like it. Rarely have those critical of the show tried to make a claim that the acting was poor, or that the scripts weren't well written or anything else substantial.

Viewers complained about the western theme, the hillbilly dialect, six-shooters, the music, the dark tone, the number of characters, etc.. I'm sure you've read more of these types of complaints than you care to, but I'm trying to make some sense out of the fact that a lot of the people that Fox expected to be instant fans of the show just didn't sign on. Part of the problem, I suspect, is that Firefly really doesn't have a target 'demographic'. A casual survey of the fansites and message boards shows a large variety of people. I think that Fox expected to have a core audience of traditional science fiction fans (trek fans) bolstered by Joss Whedon's Buffy fans. When it became clear that those people weren't watching in large numbers they started (apparently) trying to target younger viewers with those ridiculous MTV-style ads. I'm sure many of the younger crowd that did check it out weren't happy with what they saw because, once again, it wasn't what they expected.

Now, I can't speak for all Firefly fans, but part of what I like so much about the show is the very way it tweaks expections. I remember specifically when I thought this show might be something special. It was at the end of "Train Job"-not the best pilot, but still a good episode- when Mal casually kicked the big thug into the engine intake. I sat there staring at the screen, just smiling. It was so much fun precisely because it was NOT what we expected. Joss Whedon's stock in trade is in tweaking expectations. The one thing you might expect in an ME script is that you'll get something you didn't expect.

The problem is, only a small percentage of viewers really like this kind of thing. I don't mean Firefly is doomed to a small fanatical following. What I mean is most people prefer the comfort of predictability. Sure, they like excitement and humor, but given a choice they'll take the complacency of yet another formula show, because its just like some other show they liked. If they are given time, and if there is enough buzz, (in other words, if they think everyone else is doing it) they will watch the show and fall in love with it the way we have, but its not the kind
of thing they will seek out on their own.

The problem gets worse when you try to target that small percentage of people who will be drawn to something truly new and original, because they don't exist in any specific demographic. They are older, younger, female, male -- the only thing that really ties them together is they are pretty tired of the same old stuff. There are enough of us out there to support a show like Firefly, but we don't fit into some specific slice on a pie chart. Its been shown over and over, that groundbreaking art, especially television, tends to flounder while it finds it audience. All in the Family, MASH, Cheers... all these had slow starts, but they had leadership that recognized the quality and had the patience to wait for momentum to build.

So now we hold our breaths, waiting to see if UPN has the kind of leadership and patience that FOX obviously lacked....

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

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

Thursday, January 2, 2003 9:05 PM

HJERMSTED


All audience building takes is time. Look at X-Files. That show was new, different and tweaked people's expectations. Was it a cop show? was it about aliens? was it a conspiracy drama? X-Files was edgy, unique and on Fox just like Firefly. In TV terms, that was a whole era ago now Fox is less edgy, more stodgy and harbors delusions of being in the network top 3.

I work with a couple dudes that are total sci fi geeks. Farscape was their show and Babylon 5 before that. They gave up on Firefly around the "Jaynestown" episode. This means they saw "Train Job", "Bushwacked", "Shindig", "Safe", and "Our Mrs. Reynolds". Only "Bushwacked" and parts of "...Reynolds" are comparable to hard sci-fi. The other episodes were planet-based and therefore more western in nature.

Had My co-workers hung on, they would have seen "Out of Gas", "Ariel", "War Stories", "Objects In Space", and a re-worked "Serentiy"... six of the finest hours of sci fi TV I have ever witnessed with very few planet side scenes.

It is now my mission to get these sci-fi co-workers of mine to sit down and watch the episodes they blew off.

Like it or not, WE are the buzz builders for Firefly. The show speaks for itself. Share your tapes and VCDs with as many people as you possibly can whether they are sci-fi fans or not.

Include a couple pre-printed and addressed postcards with your dubs so your friends can scribble a quick note immediately after they are hooked and help the cause.

Keep Flying!

mattro

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

Friday, January 3, 2003 5:27 AM

ALLRONIX


Oh, Gods. I made an utter pain of myself by crashing a Deadlands game with postcards in hand and refusing to leave until each player signed one.

Will it work? I'm trying to set myself up for the mosre likely news that UPN won't take it, Joss has to walk away, tail between legs, and this little show's toast.

But, considering my whole life has been championing the impossible...what the hell?

Co-founder of the Evil Writing Crew - causing hell, one hero at a time!

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

Friday, January 3, 2003 3:10 PM

SUINEGAGPF


The answer is: peer pressure.

I am not necessarily advocating that you should corner your friends and co-workers with duct tape in hand... although it might come to that.

Most people have a basic desire to fit in (to be popular).

So what happens when something new and different appears on the scene? No one wants to be the first to try it. And worse yet, they don't want to find out that they are the only ones who like it. So if they do watch the show they are predisposed to nitpicking every little detail that doesn't conform to what is considered to be popular. And as soon as one person starts complaining they all jump on the bandwagon. Once the popular opinion has been established, it is very difficult to get people to change their minds. People who never even saw the show will be completely convinced that it is not worth seeing.

So what is the answer?

The answer is: peer pressure.

To sell a show that doesn't conform, you need some way to convince people that it is alright to like it because it is new and different. I think the network should have pre-screened the first 10 episodes to several well respected TV critics and built the initial advertising campaign solely from their favorable quotes. Get people comfortable with the idea that it is ok to like it. Then when people start to watch the show, instead of complaining about this or that they'd be more likely to just enjoy it.

And if that didn't work, then we duct tape them to their chairs and hide the remote.

----
(I know a few friends who are going to require the duct tape treatment.)

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

Friday, January 3, 2003 4:24 PM

BOBKNAPTOR


"All the cool kids are doing it"? Well, heck, it works for cigarettes......

______________
Willow: She was already smoking in fifth grade. Once I was lookout for her.
Xander: You're bad to the bone.
Willow: I'm a rebel.

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

Saturday, January 4, 2003 6:45 AM

LORA


This may sound elitist (I've been accused of worse sentiments before), but I believe that the percentage of people in the world who want to watch characters struggle to live in freedom, and succeed despite their human flaws, is very low. Most people want either a super-hero who is somehow better than everyone else (Buffy herself has weaknesses, but still possesses her unique Slayer-powers) or a supposedly realistic show where everyone behaves in a predictable, usually base, manner. Mal has an accent that would prejudice most folks to underestimate his abilities; Zoe and Wash are not the stereotypical married couple; Jayne is openly mercenary, the open part being unexpected; Kaylee is a very young woman with a talent other than looking pretty; Simon has a lot of heart, even though he's a gifted child; Book is not one's sunday school teacher; Inara is a prostitute with more class than most people can even recognize; and River is ... River. These are not characters from a soap opera -- they have depth and are well-acted. I think they are simply too much for most people.

Further, these characters have made sacrifices that make one think of the supposedly important things that could be done without in life. I believe that the majority of us avoid thinking about hard choices like that. (Shows with characters whose driving personality traits are lust and greed seem to dominate. Case in point being "The Bachelor" in all its variations.) Mal and Zoe show us the hard work and determination necessary to live for oneself and not for a social structure, and things that must be left behind to do it. Simon came out and told us in "Objects in Space" (and "Serenity", which I do wish I'd been able to see first) exactly what he left behind because he knew something more important than success.

If we can persuade other people that these characters are inspiring, we will do them a service.

I don't care, I'm still free. You can't take the sky from me.

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

Saturday, January 4, 2003 9:02 AM

GUNNAR


"Firefly" came as a surprise to me. I didn't even know it was on the schedule until the evening I saw the first episode. I found it to be more intriguing than "X-Files", the character's better written than those in "Northern Exposure" certainly far superior to the formula "CSI:" and "Law and Order" shows. The show's humor was of high quality, it's hardware far more believable (and enjoyable) than those of other sci fi programs and movies. The stories were right on for it's times and still Fox blundered. I hope UPN will now use "Firefly" as another program of quaility to add to their line up. I'm 63 years old, don't fit the demographics but I've watched and enjoyed every episode.

Keith McArthur

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

Saturday, January 4, 2003 10:08 AM

SELNYC


Quote:

Originally posted by Gunnar:
"Firefly" came as a surprise to me.



Does this mean you've never seen any of Joss Whedon's other shows? If that's the case, my friend, the best advice for you is run, don't walk, to your nearest electronics store, pick up a DVD player and the first three seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. All the stuff you like about Firefly is in there without the pesky getting cancelled thing.


Quote:

The show's humor was of high quality, it's hardware far more believable (and enjoyable) than those of other sci fi programs and movies. The stories were right on for it's times and still Fox blundered.


All of Joss Whedon's shows and screenplays combine elements in new and exciting ways. We may say Firefly is a combination of Science Fiction and Western genres, but its also about existentialism, it's about how you go on living in a world of intolerable conditions. Mal's answer is he keeps on moving.

As far as the hardware, as seen in Buffy, Joss tries to deal with fantastic elements in as realistic a fashion as possible. Real SF fans know there is no sound in space and that faster-than-light travel is like, in Gregory Benford's words, "playing tennis with the net down". That's not to say Joss doesn't take shortcuts (vamps turn into dust when staked, a convenience so we don't have a half-hour of killing vampires followed by a half-hour of burying them), but those shortcuts are in the interest of moving the story along. And as you've seen, these stories do move along.


Quote:

I'm 63 years old, don't fit the demographics but I've watched and enjoyed every episode.


Well, I'm 49 and the only demographic I fit into is the one called "People who like really good writing". When somethings well-written, it does not matter where it's set, what genre it wants to be or how big their spaceships may be. If Joss wanted to re-write the Yellow Pages, I'd read it cover-to-cover...

I'm a mean old man.

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

Saturday, January 4, 2003 11:26 AM

GUNNAR


I've only seen shorts bits of "Buffy, the Vampire Slayer" and no, I didn't know who Joss Whedon was until "Firefly". I'll have to look in at other things he has done. I'm a hard sci fi fan which is why "Firefly" surprised me so. Everything was in order like the real world, a world of discord. I always thought it foolish that other sci fi shows only dealt with Earth in an off handed way and when they did, they used it only as a backdrop. "The Train" floored me, what a mixture! Just like the real world. So I was taken too by the western background he used, the music, the clothes, the humor, the dialect and yes, the horses. It's obvious Whedon has it all working for him now (Fox just hasn't caught on yet) and it is up to me to catch up. But I do want more of "Firefly".

Is anyone doing anything about compiling tape sets?

Keith McArthur

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

Saturday, January 4, 2003 8:02 PM

SELNYC


Quote:

Originally posted by Gunnar:
I'm a hard sci fi fan which is why "Firefly" surprised me so. Everything was in order like the real world, a world of discord. ... But I do want more of "Firefly".

Is anyone doing anything about compiling tape sets?



I'm also a hard SF fan, Keith, going back 40 years or more (do the Tom Swift books count?), but I don't have to tell you about the paucity of creditable space operas or any other SF on film or TV. George Lucas, long considered the master of filmed SF, plainly has it all wrong, especially when he spends too much time considering what kinds of sounds his "space-bombs" might make in a meteor field (SW II), not to mention his heavy reliance on other people's sense of what is mythic or might resonate with a modern audience; Joss has no such problem. Aside from Silent Running, which had a multitude of other problems, I'm hard pressed to think of another big studio SF/space opera film that even came close to getting the basics right.

Blade Runner perhaps, but only because of it's dystopian view of the future, maybe the Mad Max series (looking forward to the recently announced Mad Max IV, now that Mel's involved). But neither of these films were set in space. Utopian visions of our future as evinced by the Star Trek series seem hopelessly clueless, especially when we look at the position of the world in which we live now -- it is difficult for me to feel optimistic after living through 9/11 here in NYC and then seeing what our government deems an appropriate response -- invading Iraq, which winds up smelling like we've got a couple of "ex"-oilmen in the White House looking to protect the interests of their "former" oilman colleagues.OK, I know that last part was off-topic -- sorry, spent the afternoon and evening at the bar watching football. No, I'm not drunk -- lil happy, maybe...

It is also my opinion that Gene Roddenberry, as much as he was one of the, if not the most, major figures responsible for bringing filmed SF from a niche market into the mainstream, is also responsible for much of the mis-information about what hard SF, especially space operas, is all about. At the same time, let's also note that both Roddenberry and Whedon "cheat" by "inventing" artificial gravity for their space ships; I'm willing to forgive Joss (and Gene) if only because showing zero gravity on an episodic weekly TV show is prohibitively expensive.

As far as tape sets go, Joss and Tim Minnear (his co-producer) have promised that, if the show goes no further, there will be a DVD set of all 15 episodes, which of course, includes the three we're not certain Fox is gonna show. E-mail me (click on my profile under one of my posts) and we may discuss this further.

In closing, let me apologize for the length of this post; it appears as though that masters degree I've been working on has increased my verbosity. I just hope I'm not turning into an academic.


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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 4:25 AM

EVANS


Quote:

Originally posted by selnyc:
As far as tape sets go, Joss and Tim Minnear (his co-producer) have promised that, if the show goes no further, there will be a DVD set of all 15 episodes, which of course, includes the three we're not certain Fox is gonna show.


They have said they will do their darnest. They have not promised they'll succeed. It requires FOX's positive attention, which we've already seen is not a sure thing.

m.
------------------------------------------------
"But ... not boring, like she made it sound." Wash, in ARIEL
"None of it means a damn thing." Mal, in OBJECTS IN SPACE

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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 5:16 AM

GUNNAR


I'll make this quick and to the point. I've just signed a petition and found I'm the 84th person to sign it. ONLY 84? Is there something wrong here or have I signed the wrong petition. Is this site the one to save "Firefly"? Please enlighten me.

Keith A. McArthur

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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 5:35 AM

RADEGUND


Quote:

Originally posted by Gunnar:
I'll make this quick and to the point. I've just signed a petition and found I'm the 84th person to sign it. ONLY 84? Is there something wrong here or have I signed the wrong petition. Is this site the one to save "Firefly"? Please enlighten me.

Keith A. McArthur



www.fireflysupport.com is the best place to check for "save Firefly" activities, and they're running a postcard campaign, not an online petition. One hundred individual postcards makes more of an impression than one petition with a hundred signatures. That's not to say you shouldn't sign the petition, just don't let that replace also sending postcards.

Radegund

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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 6:45 AM

GUNNAR


Radegund, thanks for your help. I had viewed that page ( www.fireflysupport.com) but had not realized its importance. A personal view, I would hope that each person who becomes a member of this site sends in an old fashioned post card. E-mails are easy but they don't have the bulk or receiving value as a post card.

And by the way, does anyone out there have any taped episodes they might want to help build into a full set? Unfortunately I only have one episode to offer.

Keith A. McArthur

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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 6:51 AM

ZSAIQAIS


Quote:

Most people have a basic desire to fit in (to be popular).

So what happens when something new and different appears on the scene? No one wants to be the first to try it. And worse yet, they don't want to find out that they are the only ones who like it. So if they do watch the show they are predisposed to nitpicking every little detail that doesn't conform to what is considered to be popular. And as soon as one person starts complaining they all jump on the bandwagon. Once the popular opinion has been established, it is very difficult to get people to change their minds. People who never even saw the show will be completely convinced that it is not worth seeing.



Being 13 years old, I can tell you it's pathetically true. Nobody wants to talk to the new kid because he/she might be a prep/skater/schoolgirl and thus ruin your image if seen talking to them.

Fox is a dull, pathetic network which doesn't really have anything on. I got into Firefly by watching John Doe, but found out that Firefly was the better show! I think John Doe is some weird wannabe Pretender thing...

But really, I only watch Fox because of Firefly, and the Sunday evening line-up. Their Saturday morning line-up was good, but they scrapped it, and put in all these wierd anime shows that no ones ever heard of...

BUt seriously, the pilot was supposed to draw people in, but since they didn't air it, alot of people didn't watch it, cause "The Train Job" didn't make any sense. My mom made me watch Firefly after that, because it was too confusing.

Another TV show that had some problems of the 'Hating it before you've seen it' variety was Stargate: SG-1's Jonas Quinn. Believe me, that guy had some serious opposition...

Enterprise is getting stale. Farscape is being cancelled. Stargate has 'problems'. I need my Firefly fix!

Oh, and I didn't know who Joss Whedon was before this, either. The first (and last) time I saw Buffy, I was 8 years old, it was Halloween night, and I had eaten WAY too much candy. And now that I'm old enough to enjoy the show, I can't jump into it, cause it's on it's last season.


ZsaiQais, running around in circles.

Hey, do you like the emoticons?


FOX is going to hell.


Fox


FOX Firefly
(or should it be the other way around?)

FOX



FOX's nightmare: Firefly's retribution




Another nightmare of retribution


my attitude toward FOX.

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

Sunday, January 5, 2003 8:41 AM

EVANS


Quote:

Originally posted by ZsaiQais:
The first (and last) time I saw Buffy .... And now that I'm old enough to enjoy the show, I can't jump into it, cause it's on it's last season.


Jump in anyway; you will like it, I think. The first two seasons are out on DVDs, and they're not expensive (especially compared to Farscape!). The third season DVD set is coming soon. Reruns are shown all the time. There are many good Websites that have spoilers galore and character/episode discussions. My personal favorite is www.buffyguide.com.

m.
------------------------------------------------
"But ... not boring, like she made it sound." Wash, in ARIEL
"None of it means a damn thing." Mal, in OBJECTS IN SPACE

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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 7:32 AM

HKCAVALIER


I've been thinking. "Trekkies" and sci-fi fans in general would probably come under the heading of "urban intellectuals." What is it that urban intellectuals can proverbially agree on? Isn't it true that the vast, vast majority of such people hate country music? Country music is the epitome of uncool in such circles. Isn't it an utter cliche, "I like all kinds of music--besides rap and country?" This is why it doesn't seem to me such a great idea to market Firefly just to sci-fi fans. What happened next was all that I-hate-the-westernness-of-Firefly on all those sci-fi measage boards. Bad, bad word of mouth. At the very least, don't show The Train Job first, arguably one of the most utterly "western" of the Firefly eps. (I know it's been said a million times but "Serenity" would have been such a better choice. It would have de-emphasized the western stuff, put it in the proper sociological context, and it had one of the best action sequences--the Reaver chase--on T.V.)

My button says: WWFT? (What Was Fox Thinking?)

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 8:03 AM

SERGEANTX


Yeah,

You're right, country music gets a pretty bad rap (hehe) from the urban intellectual types, but that just goes back to my original post concerning expectations. The fact is, for those willing to look for it, there's a lot of really good country music out there. It never gets played on the radio, and the artists lanquish in obscurity, but for some of us, there's nothing quite so moving as a harmonica, banjo, acoustic guitar, violin(fiddle).... simple music that lets the lyrics shine. I'll grant you, the overwhelming message of most mainstream country music is "ain't it great to be stupid". But anyone who thinks that's all there is needs to look up Whiskeytown, Uncle Tupelo, John Prine, Nanci Griffith, Jeff Black, Ryan Adams, Robbie Fulks... Its all a matter of taste I suppose, but is also a matter of expectations -- a lot like Firefly.

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 9:25 AM

GUAILO


i gotta go all the way back to SargeantX's original post (mainly cause I haven't read any others but that one soo far...so sue me...lol) to really give my version of an answer to the question raised: "Why is Firefly a 'Hard Sell'?"

Quote:

I first heard about Firefly on slashdot.org. I remember, that while the article was positive, a majority of the follow up posts were critizing the concept and obviously not pre-sold fans. Their comments, and most of the negative comments I've seen since about Firefly, had a consistent thread. Most of them were really just saying that Firefly wasn't what they expected, therefore they didn't like it. Rarely have those critical of the show tried to make a claim that the acting was poor, or that the scripts weren't well written or anything else substantial.


I've read many of those types of posts mostly in the initial stages of Firefly's existance, and I gotta say I agree with them 100% - it wasn't what I expected.

Why it wasn't what I expected is really the issue I thing, however. Remember the scene...

Quote:

(MAL, ZOE and JAYNE standing on a ridge awaiting a meeting with gangsters expecting a 'double cross'. JAYNE tests the communication gear)

JAYNE: Testing Testing...
MAL: I'm right here Jayne.
JAYNE: Yeah, you're commin' in loud and clear too.
MAL: That's...'cause I'm standing right here.



Great scene, and what I expected to see when I tuned in that first night for the series premier.

Not what I got.

What I got was good, but I recalled things seeming a little fractured and sometimes inconsistant, although I couldn't put my finger on exactly why. Came to find out after about four or five episodes aired that they were out of order, that the original pilot (the episode with the above scene) wasn't going to be aired by Fox (at least not yet) and that Fox had decided to rearange the episodes in a more appropriate order because of that.

Also, most of the subsequent commercials for the show followed the "From the creator of Buffy" track, which may have turned some folks off. I would have done so for me had I not been aware of Joss's Sci Fi and action film work (Alien4 and Speed to touch the tip of that iceberg).

As the show continued to aire, I realized (probably around 'Out of Gas') that this show was destined to be really great. All the episodes after that seemed to really gel the crew. I found out after that, that the original inteded airing order had been reestablished...no wonder it made more sense.

Fox should have re-run the season until the Fall Sweeps in February, starting with a re-airing of the 2hour pilot (the actual pilot that is) and then with each episode in succession as originally intended to air, in order. Joss's order. The man has yet to screw up a franchise and the reality is just the opposite - failing franchises have had a resurgeance because of his work. Fox simply took matter into thier own hands and decided to market the show as "Buffy in Space", which frankly had me turned off until I saw the longer trailers advertising wild west style adventures in space.

That's what I expected, and that's eventually what I got. Too bad Fox couldn't see past thier own hype.

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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 1:43 PM

LIVINGIMPAIRED


.... Hey guys! Just got back from vacation and WHAT THE !#$%#$^@#!!!!! I go away for a couple of weeks, and the show gets cancelled.

A previous poster is right. Fox is going to Hell. I will never watch them again... not even for the Simpsons, which I love.

Now excuse me while I go into a corner and cry.

________________

BOOK: Afraid I might be needing a preacher.
MAL: That's good. You lie there and be ironical.

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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 9:14 PM

KANDIMONKEY


Quote:

Originally posted by Guailo:
Fox simply took matter into thier own hands and decided to market the show as "Buffy in Space", which frankly had me turned off until I saw the longer trailers advertising wild west style adventures in space.



I don't know why the trailers didn't run on Cartoon Network during their Saturday night anime block.

I saw maybe five trailers for "Firefly" before the first airing, and it reminded me a lot of "Outlaw Star," an anime show that I like. So that is why I first tuned in. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that it was really a western, it was just set in outer space. "Firefly" is perfect for people like me who were raised with both John Wayne and "Star Wars." But that isn't a neat little demographic categoery, so FOX doesn't know how to pitch it.

Although "Firefly" is really unique, it is more like most of the anime shows I watch than it is like the sci-fi shows. And there has been some discussion among anime fans that "Firefly" reminds them of both "Outlaw Star" and "Cowboy Bebop," the latter of which is a very good, gritty & adult show. Which suggests to me that quite a few anime fans tuned into "Firefly" for the same reason I did, but stayed because it is a good show.




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

Tuesday, January 7, 2003 9:28 PM

SHADOWWALKER


Quote:

Originally posted by LivingImpaired:


A previous poster is right. Fox is going to Hell. I will never watch them again... not even for the Simpsons, which I love.

________________

Wouldn't ya know it--I come to this site now that the show's gone? I'm nothing if not behind the times, huh?
Anyway, FOX is the refuge of the lowest common denominator, IMHO. Firefly was the only exception to that. I lost interest in The Simpsons years ago. (I can only watch a guy burp & find it amusing so many times, know what I mean?) I had even grown very tired of The X-Files during the last couple of seasons (after Mulder was abducted)--flogging a dead horse, so to speak. Even their sports & news coverage follow this general rule of appealing to the basest individuals in society; I sit through their stuff on Fox Sports Net only because I'm a hyper-devoted college basketball fan, & they have a contract w/ the PAC-10.
It was only a matter of time for Firefly given the kind of culture at FOX, I guess. Rupert Murdoch is a menace to all that's decent.(He does still own FOX, right?)

Kim
*as lost as Jubel Early*

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

Wednesday, January 8, 2003 12:12 AM

GIRLIE


Silly me! I watched "Train Job" and thought- 'Not their best work but willing to stick with it.' (Huge with the not knowing about the pilot.)After that I only caught a couple of episodes(only 4 in all) due to schedule difficulties but was hooked and said --'I knew they could, this is more like it.' I was content because I thought I could catch up on those midseason reruns. Arrrggghhh! Then after watching "Ojects in space" and rewatching immediately I decided this show was too good and sure to be cancelled. I quickly went to my internet and guess what I found....That's right, I am Psycic!(and now psyco) However I am thrilled that the first time I have decided that a show is worth the effort to save, I would find so many other first timers. I am less embarrssed each time I post (never even knew how)- or see some other neewbie taking the chance to share.(Feel the love!)I became a Buffy fan on accident and quickly filled my house with them. I have been hooked on Joss and team ever since and will continue to support anything he does but in the future I will be more careful about my viewing habits.
In answer to the question "Hard Sell?" I think it's because small minded people need catagories, and if things don't fit they squish it until it does or they break it. There are still too many small minded people running things. I say, "Color outside the lines of life as much as possible children. Let the teacher conform to you." And Screw that whole spelling thing too!

"Objects in the mirror may not be as smart as they appear!" --Mine I think.

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

Wednesday, January 8, 2003 6:28 AM

GUAILO


I think that's the real shame. Had Fox advertised Firefly as a western and nothing else, I'd bet we'd have much the same result anyway. But the marketting strategy they decided on didn't help.

I too grew up on John Wayne and Clint Eastwood movies (the latter of which were very dark and sinister and heavy but seem to have done pretty good by ol' Clint) as well as Wild, wild west on TV. Star Trek and Space: 1999 didn't come into my life until later and so I really got started with western themes and the idea that good guys may win in the end, but it's not usually the way one might expect.

To me, that's Mal and the gang to a "T" and had Foc tried harder to represent that facet, sort of ignoring the "...in space" part of the scenario in the promotion of the show, it may have gone better.

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

Wednesday, January 8, 2003 5:18 PM

SENSOU


New theroy, new theroy, and this one holds up to the light of day!
Not enough deceit by the 'good guys.' They are basically honest with each other and they know it. The crew also knows when people are not being honest. Thus, there are no unexpexted betrayels and while we may see them coming, we don't know exactly what is going to happen.
Also, the peole, as real as they seem, are fictional. Our society is entertained the cheapest by the suffering of others. If people are not real, they cannot suffer. Thus, we are not entertained (according to the model).
And, for the third strike, Murphy's Law. Everything that can go wrong will, and at the worst possible time. When our country is in danger of being deluded into going to war, we need something to:
a.) Show us what could happen in a form we can easily comprehend. (dead guys, Blue Hands, rotton treatment of vetrans)
b.) Strip our illusions. Good guys don't always win, monkey-man.
c.) Remind us of the dangers of big government.

It is a proven fact that people schedule there lives around TV. Let's take advantage of that. If Firefly is good enough and not in THE TIMESLOT OF DOOM, we could improve humanity with it. (Can you tell I really want it back on? Gettting off the rabid-hamster-wheel-cum-soapbox and getting the pretty purple pills now.)

Sensou
P.S. This is what I sound like when I'm awake. Other wise it would come out as: "people are bloodthirsty morons and only care when the pain is real." If I was feeling particlualrly cynical, I would have added "and we don't mind fake blood if that means we get more. Take the army monkey-man is sending to the Middle East and send it to FUX headquaters."

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

Thursday, January 9, 2003 6:12 AM

GUAILO


Intersting...um....theory?

Not sure I followed too much of that.

I dont' feel "deluded" into anything, but I can say that entertainment by default can teach. If you look at the intended airing order of the episodes, the moral statement makes much more sense. Violence is bad, but for in the defense of one's family, which Mal considers his crew.

Being from Texas, I felt drawn to Firefly as a post civil war story where it focused (finally) on the losing side, having lost in spite of all thier good intentions and hard fough war against the corporate boot-heel twisting Allience. The Allience wanted to suddenly control trade and government in full on colony worlds, and the colony worlds fought back against that cause. South vs. North, except this show put the South in the spotlight. That alone is unpalatable to many average Americans.

It goes back to the story order though. Had the war come first, then the loss, then the reaction and forming of the crew, the morality of the characters would have been more clear and the show would probably have established more viewership.

I could be wrong, but the logical progression of events is sometime pretty crucial to telling a story...(lol)

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

Saturday, October 4, 2003 12:04 PM

MOJAVERATTLER


Anyone who plays and enjoys Deadlands will enjoy firefly. Nothing like putting spins on westerns.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL