We're reviewing Firefly in it's entirety! by BofHam

FIREFLY EPISODE DISCUSSIONS

We're reviewing Firefly in it's entirety!

scan this with your smart phone to obtain URL for this page

POSTED BY: BOFHAM
UPDATED: Saturday, August 6, 2011 17:24
SHORT URL: http://bit.ly/iqZNpX
VIEWED: 7833
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, April 21, 2011 12:45 AM

BOFHAM

One episode at a time by a FF virgin. Check out http://bofham.blogspot.com/p/tv.html for the full list.

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

Thursday, April 21, 2011 4:03 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST

How come he missed out Our Mrs Reynolds?

Nice to read that. We're all entitled to our opinion and I guess it's interesting to compare Firefly of yesteryear to TV of today, but I can't say as I've ever thought of Firefly as campy? A point that is raised a great deal. Cheap in parts sure, but I've never equated campy with cheap? What do you all think?

Cartoons - http://cirqusartsandmusic.blogspot.com

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

Thursday, April 21, 2011 4:38 AM

BYTEMITE

I think for some people that a lot of jokes, cheap effects, and lens flares that call back to the seventies means "campy."

I think they're incorrectly defining the genre of camp, but what can you do?

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

Friday, April 22, 2011 5:32 AM

BYTEMITE

Ack! The guy hated Jaynestown?!

Okay, I have a new theory: people who can't handle out and out western elements in their sci-fi maybe shouldn't watch Firefly. They tend to just get annoyed more then anything.

Damn man, it's a matter of taste, not production quality and camp. Learn how to be fuggin' OBJECTIVE, yeah?

I'll give him he does point out some problems that come up in planet-side plots, but then he seems to automatically assume that the planet-side stuff is so "jarring" for everyone else that it can't smooth those out. And that's when he's called something "unbelievable" but then not a few episodes later the same issue comes up and he's praising it.

His occasional sincerity is undercut by later snark that is entirely out of place, not funny, sometimes in bad taste, and mostly in for the sake of the snark.

I can forgive someone not liking the show because it's not their thing, but the review writer himself needs to be consistent. Can he see why "Firefly was destined for cancellation" or does he think that Firefly was "a decent sci-fi cut down in it's prime"? It really can't be both, because without further elaboration that's a contradiction. Do Simon and Kaylee's arguments come out of nowhere and does the relationship seem forced, or is it "believable"? Is Inara an admirable woman who can handle her world on her own, or does she deserve cheap shots about having not used protection when she goes to a medical check-up?

There are so many little things he seems to miss about the plot and the characters that explain a number of the issues that he brings up. I can't help but feel like he was only barely watching the episodes, deliberately skimming the surface, phoning in this review, and doing his best to be diplomatic while the whole time having an undertone of not really liking it and wanting to mock it.

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

Friday, April 22, 2011 6:07 AM

OLDGUY

What Would Mal do ?

growing up with many a sci-fi show, I often felt cheated when some movie or TV series would tout itself as "futuristic" but after only a few seconds of FX shots and backdrops of flashing lights and whirring sounds, they'd somehow manage to drop themselves into the past , which of course just happened to be 1980. That meant they could do budget location shooting, current cars, clothes, etc all cloaked as "futuristic sci-fi"

When I first saw quick TV adds for Firefly out of the corner of my eye, I got the impression it was little more than that...a CGI of some space ship chasing horses?...and so I never even stopped in to watch an episode, couldn't figure out when the dang thing was being aired anyway (thanks Fox..nice fkup)

thank God the movie trailer at least caught my attention and I caught on to the magic of Joss's verse.
even with the many shows, like Jayne's world set in low-tech, I think because Serenity herself actually existed as a complete set, that there was enough tech blended to make me put that issue aside and enjoy the character interplay. Which was so very very good.

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

Friday, April 22, 2011 6:20 AM

BYTEMITE

I bet you never wrote a transparently diplomatic review about the "eighties is futuristic" shows when it was obvious you didn't like the genre, setting, or premise of the series. This review didn't even try to look at Firefly fairly as a whole, it just cut out or cut down anything western it saw.

If the guy really wanted to review honestly, he should have said, "I don't like the western genre, here's the things I don't like about it." Then when western elements came up in Firefly, he should have acknowledged, "okay, now here's that thing I don't like, but let's look at what they've done here that works, and what doesn't work apart from the western stuff."

Instead, what he did was a between the lines, "Ugh, western crap! Let's call it camp and skip on ahead."

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

Monday, May 2, 2011 10:37 PM

BOFHAM

A rose by any other name...

Camp is the first word that comes to mind for most of the dusty scenes. Our Heart of Gold review delves slightly deeper into why, exactly, these scenes ring hollow.

But we've finished the show in any event and found it quite to our liking. Last up is the movie which I'm almost hesitant to watch. I don't want it to end.

http://bofham.blogspot.com/p/tv.html

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

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 12:26 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST

I think to quantify your review and statements such as this:

"'Shorn of this, Firefly suddenly seems destined for the rubbish bin.'"
or
"Continuing proof that a show which depends on Nathan Fillion has problems larger than Fox executives."

You should consider reviewing another show's first sixteen episodes and seeing if those episodes match that of Firefly.

(It's too easy, after the event, to say you see where the cracks are and why it failed.)

I've enjoyed reading your reviews and for the most part I agree with your praises/criticisms, but I must say I don't share your sense of 'clarity' in seeing why the network cancelled the show.

This for me has always been the issue with Firefly. Not that it's a perfect show and therefore untouchable but that it is no less rewarding than any of it's contemporaries that endured - so how come it was taken off the air?

Cartoons - http://cirqusartsandmusic.blogspot.com

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

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 9:36 AM

BYTEMITE

Oh. I feel bad that some of your first experience on the board was me being a jerk.

Sorry. It's the fandumb, you know, I come down with it every now and then.

I'm afraid your Heart of Gold still doesn't really explain why the dusty planet-side scenes are so bad, apart from that they aren't as good as the ship board scenes, they're low budget, and that they're too frequent. Seeing as the whole western vibe is an integral part of the series and most of its characters, I can't say I fully understand why you're letting the western dust ball setting get in the way unless you're expecting the more lush and other-worldly planets of other sci-fi series, OR you want something that's JUST ship side, but then that's not Firefly.

You even picked up on the most viable explanation for all the Rim worlds being dustballs (the terraformers weren't paid as much and didn't try as hard to make them hospitable, the settlers are poor and have only rudimentary technology that they could afford/bring/make), but even given a valid in-verse reason for the look and feel of these scenes you still don't cut the western elements any slack.

Also, camp is when something is overexaggerated to the point of parody, superficiality, or not taking itself seriously. The western elements in Firefly are actually trying to be dramatic and sincere. I'm not even sure that it qualifies as unintentional camp; while I concede that some might consider Firefly's western elements banal or tasteless, unintentional camp is still supposed to have some kind of unintentional charm or entertaining quality (bathos, or internet vernacular, narm). If you think it's camp, but you find it utterly unenjoyable from that angle, it's probably not camp.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_%28style%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathos
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/DarthWiki/Narm
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NarmCharm

Although, interesting comments about bloopers with film crew and reflections from equipment, I never noticed that. And to be fair to you, for the Heart of Gold episode review, you only spent two paragraphs complaining about the setting and the "John Wayne" feel of the episode before getting to crucial story-telling issues, such as the heavy-handed PC villain.

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

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:21 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

When you see the movie it may be disappointing to you, I can't fix that, just know that there are others who don't prefer it. Then again, if you like it and think it was great, then you'll have plenty of people who agree with you. So either way you're in good company because we are split about the film, if it was good, if it was a good "end" or not. I come down on the didn't-really-like-the-movie side, though even I admit that it had a few good moments/good ideas.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

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

Friday, August 5, 2011 4:23 PM

BUFO

I agree with everyone. And what's with saying only a few of the actors did a good job. I thought they were all perfectly cast and were all so believable. And that goes for the supporting cast as well.

I don't know how he could criticize the planets being desolate when that was the point. They were dusty and dirty. I think they did a great job with that.

I don't buy the camp thing either. I loved everything about FF, but I must be seeing it through WhedonColored glasses.

And oh, btw, in Shindig that dance was from Pride and Prejudice not Sense and Sensibility.

And he lost all credibility when he didn't like Jaynestown. Every time I watch that ep, I'm laughing my head off.

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

Saturday, August 6, 2011 4:35 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

In Finding Serenity, I think it was, one of the essayists reports that the steadi-cam work and lens flares ARE considered as hallmarks of camp and cheesy, but that Joss embraced them deliberately.

So you either have to be prepared to hear the show called that, or expect the reviewers to observe that it transcends that.

There's plenty of stuff wrong with Firefly, but the central premise is sound and the characters are great, all of 'em, and the show was improving consistently. Many a successful show spent half of its first season balancing out what actually worked in performance from where its theoretical concept was supposed to go.

Another 13 weeks, or a full season, and it would have been absolutely great, and would have run forever. WE ALL KNOW THAT!

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

Saturday, August 6, 2011 5:08 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by BofHam:
A rose by any other name...

Camp is the first word that comes to mind for most of the dusty scenes. Our Heart of Gold review delves slightly deeper into why, exactly, these scenes ring hollow.

But we've finished the show in any event and found it quite to our liking. Last up is the movie which I'm almost hesitant to watch. I don't want it to end.

http://bofham.blogspot.com/p/tv.html

....is not the same.

I think this is the reason you are having a problem with the dusty scenes. They are not the polished versions of worlds we see in other Science Fiction. That was the point.

Personally I find the cheap, disposable looking sets on a number of Star Trek episodes far more distracting.

I also read your review of the movie. One thing that struck me about it was comments regarding Jayne. He was more then just comic relief in the series. Granted he played that part many times but we also saw examples of him being the dangerous merc he was. We see it pilot, at the end of Jayne's town, Aral, Shindig and War Stories.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

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

Saturday, August 6, 2011 5:13 PM

BYTEMITE

Well, he wanted to make it look 1970s retro to really emphasize the feel of it being found footage, but whether he wanted to be deliberately camp is dependent on how serious he was taking the series.

I think he was plenty serious about the series, therefore, probably not intentional camp. I'd argue probably not camp at all.

I think people calling it camp are confusing what exactly camp is. Just having cheesy lensflares doesn't make something camp, even if it's modern.

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

Saturday, August 6, 2011 5:19 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

I agree. That and for once setting that made sense were sued instead of ones that looked good. The whole point was to focus on people living on the fringe of society. That is hard to convey believably when things are clean and or lush and green.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

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

Saturday, August 6, 2011 5:24 PM

BYTEMITE

Ha, he even used the clean and straight laced camera work for the Alliance scenes just to set off the differences between the two.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE