GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Would you want Firefly without Mal?

POSTED BY: GWEK
UPDATED: Thursday, December 10, 2009 01:55
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 9079
PAGE 2 of 2

Friday, November 27, 2009 3:22 PM

RALLEM


Now that you mention it, didn't Joss want a dark Mal originally, but the network said no?



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

Friday, November 27, 2009 3:32 PM

ASARIAN


Quote:

Originally posted by Katesfriend:
There's no Firefly without Mal. Joss based the series on him, so the alternative is to shoot when the actors are available. I can't imagine the actors not bending over backwards to be available to do more Firefly.



I agree with every singly word.


--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam

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

Friday, November 27, 2009 3:55 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by asarian:
Quote:

Originally posted by Katesfriend:
There's no Firefly without Mal. Joss based the series on him, so the alternative is to shoot when the actors are available. I can't imagine the actors not bending over backwards to be available to do more Firefly.



I agree with every singly word.


--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam



I actually think the series is in the perspective of River and it is her observations both visually and mentally of the crew.

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

Friday, November 27, 2009 4:21 PM

PLATONIST


An absolute NO, to a Firefly series without Mal (unless it is a completely new tale in the verse with new characters), until we have, at the very least, a miniseries, a feature length film, or a straight to DVD of either of these, which resolves unanswered storylines, like Inara's secret.

And… huh… okay, how does this whole Mal/Kaylee and Simon/Inara hook up thingy work? Because I must of have been absent that day. Opposites or not, they are all on the ship bound by the need of freedom. The reasons of why and how they got on the boat may be different, like Mal says, but essentially they are seeking the same thing. Freedom is their bonding commonality, not what they are trained to do. These are people, not mechanical, doctoring, companioning bots.

I’m not sure how portraying strong loving relationships within a family structure screws with the dynamics of the show, considering that one of the defining themes of the show is the strength of family and the ties that bind. So, I’m going to need some elaboration on that comment.

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

Friday, November 27, 2009 5:14 PM

KATESFRIEND


I am still amazed that one little TV show can appear in so many different visages to so many different people, be deeply meaningful to all, be debated, dissected, and with (occasionally) exceptional tolerance, be seen in so many completely different ways, and still be the same show. If its deeper meanings can appear so different to so many eyes, it really is a work of art. Now, try to find common ground in discussing art - good luck!

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

Friday, November 27, 2009 5:37 PM

RALLEM


Quote:

Originally posted by Platonist:
An absolute NO, to a Firefly series without Mal (unless it is a completely new tale in the verse with new characters), until we have, at the very least, a miniseries, a feature length film, or a straight to DVD of either of these, which resolves unanswered storylines, like Inara's secret.

And… huh… okay, how does this whole Mal/Kaylee and Simon/Inara hook up thingy work? Because I must of have been absent that day. Opposites or not, they are all on the ship bound by the need of freedom. The reasons of why and how they got on the boat may be different, like Mal says, but essentially they are seeking the same thing. Freedom is their bonding commonality, not what they are trained to do. These are people, not mechanical, doctoring, companioning bots.

I’m not sure how portraying strong loving relationships within a family structure screws with the dynamics of the show, considering that one of the defining themes of the show is the strength of family and the ties that bind. So, I’m going to need some elaboration on that comment.


When you say an absolute no to a firefly without Mal, do you mean no Mal with Nathan or no Mal with a different actor?



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

Friday, November 27, 2009 6:42 PM

BYTEMITE


I dunno about Platonist, but even though I could kind of sort of understand someone else playing Mal... I'd actually kind of feel sorry for Nathan. I mean, it doesn't seem like a week can go by without him gushing about how much he loved his character, the show, and all the friends he'd met. Seems kind of mean to deny him that.

I'm also reasonably sure that there is no human on Earth who can withstand sad-eyed Nathan, let alone pouty sad-eyed Nathan, so I'm going to file "hiring a different actor" under "defies the laws of physics."

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

Friday, November 27, 2009 8:33 PM

PLATONIST


Well, I'm going to go with Nathan as Mal or no Mal at all, in the time line we've seen so far. I could see another actor playing a much younger Mal, like a reboot of Mal leaving Shadow, and meeting a younger Zoe, the early years, which could be done rather well as long as Joss was involved.

But another actor attempting to embody Mal, at the point we last saw the crew, no, I don’t think I’d be sold. And, like B said, it would be crushing for Nathan as he has said that he wanted Joss to have Mal die before another actor could play him.

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 1:00 AM

RALLEM


Maybe they could do a Firefly Reboot where everything is different much like the Startrek reboot. I wouldn't think they would all tie it in with a time traveller and dimension travelling crew member though...



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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 3:53 AM

ZZETTA13


Actually there are certain elements ( and people) that I feel a successful tv program or movie can not do without. Mal Reynolds (Nathan) being one of them as pertaining to FF. He could not be replace with another actor and could not be a character that just wandered in from time to time either. Captain Reynolds was the main character and the glue that kept all of the other crew in place.

It’s a little odd, but since I’ve been watching the dvds of FF for several years now I find that the short run tv series was more about the “people” than about being in space. Although I really enjoy si/fi and space adventure, Firefly could have almost taken place on a ship in the vast ocean sailing from place to place and as long as the crew of the good ship Serenity were onboard doing their day to day happenings I’d still have thought it was interesting and worth watching. It was that well written.

Now if Firefly were to actually return to television or the big screen I do hope it would be pre BDM. I would miss Wash and Book being on the boat. Something I see many browncoats are still angered at Joss about ( yepper me too). So in reality I guess I would feel saddened if any of her crew (Serenity’s) could not return for a continuing voyage of verse adventures.

Z


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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:24 AM

PEROXIDEPIRATE


It's exciting that this is even the subject of discussion. Here are my opinions...

Best (semi-viable) possibility: DVD movie(s) or miniseries with all surviving characters played by the original actors

Minimum necessary for a new TV series to work: Zoe, Kaylee, Simon, River, at least occasional appearances by Inara, and either Jayne or Mal. Plus some interesting new characters.

Problem with the above: Nathan Fillion's the one you probably can't get. And I can't think of a single reason Mal would willingly leave the ship, or a reason for the others to be together off the ship. So Mal would have to be A. dead, or B. mysteriously missing, and they spend the whole series looking for him.

New series with new characters set in the same verse: would be interesting... but it seems silly, if the actors from the original are still interested in the project. Unless it takes place 10-15+ years after the original, and the original actors show up as frequent guest stars.

Only thing I would refuse to watch: the same characters recast with different actors. Especially Mal -- it's Nathan Fillion or nobody.

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:42 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT


Quote:

Originally posted by zzetta13:
Actually there are certain elements ( and people) that I feel a successful tv program or movie can not do without. Mal Reynolds (Nathan) being one of them as pertaining to FF. He could not be replace with another actor and could not be a character that just wandered in from time to time either. Captain Reynolds was the main character and the glue that kept all of the other crew in place.


Said it before in other threads, but I'll say it here again: There is no sense to the notion that only one actor can ever play any character-- look at James Bond, or Batman. Or can you imagine Mel Gibson being the only actor to ever play Hamlet?

Mal is an interesting, complex character-- different actors coming to the same role bring different things, cause different responses. That's the basis of live theatre. Example, Zero Mostel played Pseudolus in the Broadway production of A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To the Forum, and the film version, even though the role was written for Phil Silvers. I saw Silvers do it in the 1980's revival. Sometime in the 90's Nathan Lane did it on Broadway. When he left the show, he was replaced by Whoopi Goldberg. All 4 were *F*U*N*N*Y*, incredibly so. But they were all different.

S'been done in TVland , too, usually only with minor characters... Lionel in All In The Family and the Jeffersons, and Darrin Stevens in Bewitched.

Not sayin' folks don't have a right to prefer one actor over another, or that the chemistry doesn't change, or that it's easy and doesn't take careful writing and skilled acting, but it can be done.

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:52 AM

NCBROWNCOAT

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:53 AM

NCBROWNCOAT


How did it happen again?

http://fireflyfaninnc.livejournal.com/








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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:53 AM

NCBROWNCOAT


I vote for Steamer to take over the role of Mal then. There is a certain resemblance...

All kidding aside you are right about different actors bringing different things to the same role.

Even the same actor can bring different things to different roles. NF is brilliant and incredibly funny (with a serious streak underneath) in Castle but Castle is entirely different from Mal.

It's easy for me to separate the two characters despite being played by the same actor, a feat some less talented actors can't do. They are always playing variations of their most famous role.

http://fireflyfaninnc.livejournal.com/








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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 5:57 AM

RALLEM


I remember lots of people saying the reboot to Star Trek being a stupid idea and that nobody could replace William Shatner as Kirk, but they were all proved wrong, and I think if another Firefly did hit the air with another cast of actors it would make our doubters look dumb. Of course with that said, I think it would take a really smart recast, which would have to match what ever change in direction the new show would take from the original. Maybe in the new show some of the outer planets would win their independence, and besides things being harder for those outer planets because things won't get to the people, (without ships like Serenity)maybe the Alliance would be more dangerous than they were in the original series.



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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 6:07 AM

BYTEMITE

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 6:20 AM

PEROXIDEPIRATE


Yeah, very good points about character vs. actor. Could be that I'm just not ready to see another actor play Mal. Could be that they decide to go that route and I end up pleasantly surprised.

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 9:25 AM

RALLEM


I really don't think we have a choice in the matter, becasue if they choose to make a new Firefly, (which I doubt they will) then they will maybe ask the entire cast to rejoin the show, and they may not. If they do then won't they be painting themselves into a corner by having to conform to Josh's original idea? Maybe even Josh would change a few ideas with Firefly and want a new cast. Also won't a few of the actors from the original show refuse for professional and personal reasons?



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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 10:18 AM

ZZETTA13


Quote:

Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Quote:

Originally posted by zzetta13:
Actually there are certain elements ( and people) that I feel a successful tv program or movie can not do without. Mal Reynolds (Nathan) being one of them as pertaining to FF. He could not be replace with another actor and could not be a character that just wandered in from time to time either. Captain Reynolds was the main character and the glue that kept all of the other crew in place.


Said it before in other threads, but I'll say it here again: There is no sense to the notion that only one actor can ever play any character-- look at James Bond, or Batman. Or can you imagine Mel Gibson being the only actor to ever play Hamlet?

Mal is an interesting, complex character-- different actors coming to the same role bring different things, cause different responses. That's the basis of live theatre. Example, Zero Mostel played Pseudolus in the Broadway production of A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To the Forum, and the film version, even though the role was written for Phil Silvers. I saw Silvers do it in the 1980's revival. Sometime in the 90's Nathan Lane did it on Broadway. When he left the show, he was replaced by Whoopi Goldberg. All 4 were *F*U*N*N*Y*, incredibly so. But they were all different.

S'been done in TVland , too, usually only with minor characters... Lionel in All In The Family and the Jeffersons, and Darrin Stevens in Bewitched.

Not sayin' folks don't have a right to prefer one actor over another, or that the chemistry doesn't change, or that it's easy and doesn't take careful writing and skilled acting, but it can be done.



I agree, there have been many 007s and many very good actors have played Mr. Bond, but I don’t think ( and it’s just my opinion) that every actor that has played the secret agent has actually won fans over as being England’s top spy. I just don’t see it that way. I do believe the box office will atone to that.

Yes, there have been lots of changes in television and movies. I don’t agree with all of them and I don’t have to like them. Originality can much time breed success, any changes that occur must be met with the understanding that it may not work.

The “Bewitched” thing I remember and I don’t feel worked well. I don’t think the show lasted very long after that. I don’t know the reason might be people lost interest. I know I did.

Anyway IMHO the original actors that played the characters of Firefly pretty much own those parts. I can’t say this enough, this is just me, it‘s my opinion…..it’s how I feel. Introducing a new Mal or a new Jayne Cobb would take a heck of a lot of getting used to. Studios will do what they will do…..so the browncoats have no control there. I do Believe that Nathan would be happy to entertain the role of Malcolm Reynolds again, I think they all would in some form or fashion. I’m glad to hear rumors of the positive about it right now. Don’t know if anything will come of it but I still hold.

Another thing there is no way of knowing even with all the original players back if FF could produce the magic it once had. Joss said so himself. I sure would like to see it given a whir though.

Z


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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:25 PM

BYTEMITE


The movie worked out pretty well, with the magic being retained. Although I've often wondered, if they hadn't known Firefly was on the chopping block as they did, would they have gotten so close? Nathan and Joss were instrumental in firing everyone up, from what I hear they absolutely were, and that might not have changed if the pressure was off. Still, it's something to ponder.

Another one, if the series had gone multiple seasons, how would group dynamics have evolved? Some people like the pranks more than others.

So here's a completely rhetorical question. If further Firefly soured the established cast relationships and experiences, would you still want them? Or would you want the actors to continue to remember Firefly with fondness?

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

Saturday, November 28, 2009 5:17 PM

MACBAKER


No Mal, no Firefly!

You might be able to do a new Star Trek without Shatner, but you can't have Firefly without Nathan!

I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.

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

Sunday, December 6, 2009 3:32 AM

VERASAMUELS


It'll be interesting to see what Browncoats make of 'Browncoat:Redemption' slated to be released next September in time for Dragon Con...

Devout Keeper of Jayne's Lunchbox

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

Sunday, December 6, 2009 3:42 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


There's no show without Mal. He's THE central character, if there can be such a thing in such an ensemble cast. It would already have the deck stacked against it without Wash or Book, but without Mal, forget it.

Movies with full crew, please.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

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

Sunday, December 6, 2009 5:31 AM

CAPELLA


Well, I would appreciate any Joss show from the 'verse, a spinoff or a continuation of Firefly. I think it would be a mistake, though, to let the actual crew of the Serenity sail on without the captain. Mal is largely responsible for the way the different characters interact and brings a whole lot of humor and drama to the show himself.

Let's not forget, that Nathan Fillion is _the_ greatest browncoat of all, though. I am sure, if Joss found a producer for a new Firefly series, Nathan would do anything to be in it, Castle or no Castle.

Keep flyin',
Capella

I did the mighty and that's what makes me impossible ... no, wait ... that's wrong ...

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

Sunday, December 6, 2009 7:19 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Yuppers. If you want to do a Firefly SPINOFF, or a reboot, with DIFFERENT cast, different ship, etc., that's fine. But if you're doing THESE characters, it's gotta have Mal, and only Nathan is Mal.

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

Thursday, December 10, 2009 1:55 AM

COMMANDLINEGAMER


Mal/Kaylee hook-up? Have you forgotten they're like brother and sister? Not gonna happen in this verse.

But on the main topic, Serenity is Mal's boat and it would be difficult to see it without him, though of course being Whedon, we know anyone can die at any time.

I see more possibility in other stories set in the same verse, not necessarily as long as the Star Trek canon; I think 6-13 episode self-contained series work quite well.



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

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
76th Independent Battalion Part 48
Thu, August 6, 2020 10:48 - 2193 posts
Brenda? Are You Watching FBI: Most Wanted?
Thu, July 30, 2020 13:26 - 10 posts
A Conversation with Nathan Fillion at ComiCon@home
Tue, July 28, 2020 17:45 - 5 posts
Watched the pilot again a couple nights ago... what...how...?
Mon, July 27, 2020 14:39 - 18 posts
Thread of Font Colors
Sat, July 25, 2020 12:19 - 27 posts
Thread of GIFs
Thu, July 23, 2020 14:54 - 9 posts
PES 2021 in stores at an absolute bargain price
Fri, July 17, 2020 00:02 - 1 posts
Joss Whedon to direct 'Glee'
Wed, July 15, 2020 19:58 - 26 posts
Joss Whedon accused of something...not sure what
Sun, July 12, 2020 01:51 - 17 posts
NBA 2K21 shows Kobe Bryant on the cover of the “Mamba Forever” edition
Fri, July 3, 2020 02:59 - 1 posts
What's a Libertarian? (A MUST READ)
Tue, June 30, 2020 15:46 - 17 posts
Dumb Democrats are Dumb
Fri, June 19, 2020 12:14 - 2 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL