Firefly Movie by Trilly

Every few days seems to bring incrementally better news.

But, for now, is gossip. Is people talking. When I read that sets are being built and reels are rolling, THEN is solid, is fact.

Not that I'm being a wet blanket; I've got the swimmies in the thorax at every little snippet that comes our way. I'm just saving the Big Whoops and Yeehas till there's a Real Official Word. Once-bitten and all that.

Still, I think there's room for some smallish whoops and yeehas!

Keep flyin' (and hopin')!!

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 7:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
But, for now, is gossip. Is people talking. When I read that sets are being built and reels are rolling, THEN is solid, is fact.

That is hilarious.

I wonder why they went with "Serenity" as the working name? I thought it would be temporary until I saw it on Universal's site. A name change is a good way to disassociate two related products - but does Firefly have any bad press that they need to get away from? Well, I suppose the fans will suspect that's our movie anyways.

I just wish www.serenity.com wasn't about bladder control.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 7:53 AM

MYCROFT2

Quote:

I wonder why they went with "Serenity" as the working name? I thought it would be temporary until I saw it on Universal's site. A name change is a good way to disassociate two related products - but does Firefly have any bad press that they need to get away from? Well, I suppose the fans will suspect that's our movie anyways.

They might be thinking it is easier to build a marketing plan with a new name rather than using the original name.
After all, FOX didn't do that good a job promoting the show.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 7:57 AM

The power of Name Recognition is mighty. I'm really surprised "Firefly" isn't the title.

Maybe Fox wanted a big cut for the use of the name? But if Universal bought the rights, that doesn't make sense.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:02 AM

EVILBUNNYJOEY

Maybe they didnt want to use the name with a "failed" project, Serenity does bring new blood, anyway did u hear on fireflydvd.com he said he wanted to buy the domain of www.sereintymovie.com but it was already owned by universal, how cool is that!!!!!!!

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:28 AM

But it's not a failed a project, or Universal wouldn't be making a movie.

Firefly has received tremendous recognition for excellence and the DVD sales speak for themselves.

The "Firefly" buzz is steadily growing, in fact, this website has almost DOUBLE the traffic it did when the show aired on Fox.

I still say changing the name doesn't make sense.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:32 AM

MYCROFT2

The fans of the show are already on board with the movie. Maybe they are looking for what will grab the new viewers.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:35 AM

I'm with 'Tash on this one. At least Firefly should be in the name somewhere (e.g., "Firefly: Serenity," though I normaly dislike inserting a colon [huh-huh, huh-huh] into a title).

Still, with the right kind of marketing (which we actually have a chance of having happen, now that fux is out of the loop!) they could make "Serenity" fly. It does have a nice poetical quality as a title.

Hell's bells, they could call it "Platypus Guano" and I'd still be in line!

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:37 AM

The problem with Firefly was that nobody saw it. Changing the name to start fresh would imply that the name "Firefly" has negative name recognition.

How could this be?

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:43 AM

EVILBUNNYJOEY

It was a "failed" project in terms of the show was canned. But it has never "failed" in terms of quality and, i do agree it should be called Firefly:Sereinty but i dont blame Universal for using a different name to try and grab new viewers, loyal fans like us will watch it no matter what it is called!!!

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
Still, with the right kind of marketing (which we actually have a chance of having happen, now that fux is out of the loop!) they could make "Serenity" fly. It does have a nice poetical quality as a title.

I find it quite feminine. I'm guessing this means there aren't going to be tonnes of action scenes, and the movie will continue to focus on relationships.

Quote:
Hell's bells, they could call it "Platypus Guano" and I'd still be in line!

Sure, the name is just the initial catch, the first chance to make a first impression. Why do I think some people will be expecting a Meg Ryan drama? Something with horses, and a lone house out in the plains. Oh, maybe that's the point...

My unofficial "Firefly" movie posters have become somewhat less useful now. But I'm still anxiously waiting for them!

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:45 AM

I could easily see marketing people behaving in an almost obsessive-compulsive way; something which is even obliquely related to the specter of failure (even if we know that the "failure" was all-but pre-ordained/engineered) becomes Unclean. They re-pakcage it, count to thirteen five times, circle a pole, or whatever makes the bad feelings go away.

I'd still call it a win, though, if "Serenity" turned out to be the title. In my heart of hearts, I've always harbored a (heretical, I know) doubt about the title, "Firefly" anyway. It refers to such a small portion of the theme of the show, whereas "Serenity" carries resonances at several levels (the battle, the ship, the quest of all the characters [and the existential irony that none of them feel it, even thought they're all in it] ).

Actually, the more I think of it, the happier I would be with this as a title...

one,two,three,.....

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:53 AM

Quote:

Why do I think some people will be expecting a Meg Ryan drama? Something with horses, and a lone house out in the plains. Oh, maybe that's the point...

Actually, to look at poor Meg these days, she would pretty much be excluded from the 'verse (no aliens, after all)...

The (forgive me) "Chick Flick" connotations could be handily dispensed with in the right kind of trailer...but the emphasis on relationships does make for a nice gender cross-over appeal (hell, look at the composition of the Browncoat ranks).

Trust in Joss...

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:56 AM

RITA

Okay, I am excited by not giddily so because hey i ve been dissappointed before. So though i too went to the website and saw serenity i wasn't able to see anything other than the name so i double click and nothing. So the question i am loath to ask is how can we be sure this is really the Firefly movie? all it says is serenity and that doesn't neccessarily mean Firefly. Anyone out there that can assuage my fears

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 8:57 AM

GUNRUNNER

Hmmmm all it says is “Serenity” with no details‚ I hope that there isn’t some chick flick or romantic comedy named “Serenity” being made!

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 9:02 AM

While as an outsider I can't know this, it would make no sense from a marketing perspective. They've acquired the property, and, so far, seem inclined to make the movie. I can't see them titling another work in a way which would step on the toes of another project in the works.

But what do I know...

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 9:22 AM

ROCKETJOCK

Quote:
Originally posted by Trilly:
word on the web is the movie's working name is "serenity" and i just checked http://www.universalpictures.com/pictures_flash.html?__source=FLASH.VE
R6 and it confirms it in the comming soon section!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Wet Blanket Dept.

Umm. "Word on the web" gives the Firefly movie a working title; then Universal posts a one-word "Coming soon", w/no other information, and suddenly everyone (except Noocyte, the Niska quoter)is dancing in the aisles and backflipping over the pews like a Blues Brothers revival meeting.

To quote my good friend Arch Archibald, "I am whelmed by this news. Not overwhelmed, not underwhelmed. Just whelmed."

At this point there is nothing substantial to connect Universal's upcoming "Serentity" project with their (hypothetical) Firefly movie project; the name could be simple coincidence*

Parenthetically, "Firefly Serenity", with or without the colon, sounds more like an Estrogen Channel Chick Flick than an SF/adventure movie.

*Footquote: "This looks like a job for--Obviousman!" -- Wiley Miller, "Non Sequitur"

RocketJock

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 9:27 AM

HKCAVALIER

The purpose of a title is to attract people on the strength of the title alone. Everytime I answer one of those movie surveys they give you in the mall the first question they ask is "does the title make you want to see the movie?" So the way I see it, "Firefly" was tried and failed. It didn't make people watch it. Last year when I was trying to find a single person in Seattle who had seen the the show I did run into a sizable number of people who had heard of it, but who had never tuned in. So the name "didn't work" and they're looking for something new, hence the term "working title."

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 9:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by RocketJock:
Umm. "Word on the web" gives the Firefly movie a working title; then Universal posts a one-word "Coming soon", w/no other information, and suddenly everyone (except the Niska quoter)is dancing in the aisles and backflipping over the pews like a Blues Brothers revival meeting.

Thanks for educating me. Now, you don't mind if I keep discussing this, do you?

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:05 AM

Quote:
:
Originally posted by RocketJock:
Umm. "Word on the web" gives the Firefly movie a working title; then Universal posts a one-word "Coming soon", w/no other information, and suddenly everyone (except the Niska quoter)is dancing in the aisles and backflipping over the pews like a Blues Brothers revival meeting.

Thanks for educating me. Now, you don't mind if I keep discussing this, do you?

Hey now. I see no evidence that 'Jock was trying to shut you down, any more than I was. Just sharin' an inclination toward a touch of caution in the face of uncertainty, is all.

The news, signs, and portents are mighty promising. But a grain of salt can make the meal all the more palatable when it arrives...or something like that...

Department of Redundancy Department

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
Hey now. I see no evidence that 'Jock was trying to shut you down, any more than I was. Just sharin' an inclination toward a touch of caution in the face of uncertainty, is all.

And there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't think the "backflipping over the pews like a Blues Brothers revival meeting" was accurate or nice. RocketJock can judge me all he likes, but it's not his job to let the air out of my tires.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:37 AM

AERONSTORM

I found Firefly on the IMDB as a movie - as in pre-production! IMDB doesn't seem to put up just any rumor....

YAY!

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:42 AM

So far, here are the possiblities discussed regarding the name change from Firefly to Serenity:

1. The name was changed because Fox wanted a large percentage cut for the using the title of one of their TV shows.

2. Firefly was cancelled, and since it is a failed project, the name is now sour.

3. The title "Firefly" sucks, it didn't work before. The TV show should have been called "Serenity."

I'm going with number one. None of these options make sense to me, but #2 and #3 seem extremely unlikely.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:10 PM

KERNELM

Quote:
Originally posted by aeronstorm:
I found Firefly on the IMDB as a movie - as in pre-production! IMDB doesn't seem to put up just any rumor....

YAY!

Actually... they pretty much do. They've listed the movie as in pre-production since last September, at least. While they try to do some error checking, a lot of their info is misleading, premature, inaccurate, or downright completely wrong. The Universal page is a much better sign.

BTW, in response to some other posts in this thread, "Serenity" is still just a working title. There's no indication it's what will be eventually used. Remember that movie "Revenge of the Jedi"? ;)

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:15 PM

LANDRY

Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
Quote:

Why do I think some people will be expecting a Meg Ryan drama? Something with horses, and a lone house out in the plains. Oh, maybe that's the point...

Actually, to look at poor Meg these days, she would pretty much be excluded from the 'verse (no aliens, after all)...

The (forgive me) "Chick Flick" connotations could be handily dispensed with in the right kind of trailer...but the emphasis on relationships does make for a nice gender cross-over appeal (hell, look at the composition of the Browncoat ranks).

Trust in Joss...

Department of Redundancy Department

I don't think anyone really needs to worry about getting a lot of female audience members. One of the main problems with Firelfy from Fox's perspective was that they didn't hit the male demographic as strongly as they were hoping to. It's weird. Firefly just seems to be one of those fantastic shows that didn't come at quite the right time. If there's a God out there and if he watches T.V. then a successful Firefly movie will give it another crack at a series with the original cast intact.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:32 PM

FIREFLYWILDCARD1

People lets not throw a wet blanket on this. Under the "Coming Soon" section on Universal's website is a long list of movies. Some better known than others. However, no matter how well known (i.e. King Kong), clicking on the title get's no further information. And all the LOTR fans know that King Kong is a go. So don't throw too much emphasis on no further information available at this time thing.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 12:36 PM

FIREFLYWILDCARD1

And on the topic of the title. Maybe they'll have Firefly in it somewhere, just not the main part of the title. Personally, I think Serenity is as ungender-biased as titles come for a flick, especally a scifi/fantasy flick.

I think what they'll do is keep the title just "Serenity" but in the previews and ads have a statement "based on TV series Firefly" or something of the like. That would do a good job of informing people what this is based on as well as drag in a new audience.

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

Saturday, February 21, 2004 10:13 PM

ROCKETJOCK

Quote:
Originally posted by Saint Jayne:
Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
Hey now. I see no evidence that 'Jock was trying to shut you down, any more than I was. Just sharin' an inclination toward a touch of caution in the face of uncertainty, is all.

And there's nothing wrong with that. I just don't think the "backflipping over the pews like a Blues Brothers revival meeting" was accurate or nice. RocketJock can judge me all he likes, but it's not his job to let the air out of my tires.

Saint Jayne:

I meant neither to judge nor deflate you. Truth is, I posted my original screed before reading far enough into the thread to realize there were numerous other voices of caution. Mea Culpa.

If I was too lightheaded and dismissive in my posting, it's partially because I'd just finished a major personal creative project, and was still on an endorphin high.

I have great faith that Firefly will continue in some format, and the movie deal looks extremely promising right now. But once burned, twice shy; I'm old enough to remember the countless false starts that dogged Star Trek between cancellation and the first movie.

Trust me though, when I hear word that the Firefly film (under whatever title) is actually on the production schedule, I'll be hoofing it in the aisles like everybody else.

One observation: It's nice to be part of a community so civil that something as relatively mild as my posting can still draw ire. A flame-war site this ain't.

"I got stupid."

"Don't worry. I'm not gonna start any sword fights. I'm over that phase."

RocketJock

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 1:46 AM

OUTLANDER

I think Universal are looking at the Firefly movie as a new beginning and what better way to do that than give the movie a different title. I think people who have seen Firefly will make the connection to the movie once they have seen the trailer or the poster, and don't forget that word will spread through fans of the series and then out into the greater community.

I find it funny how people seem to think that "Serenity" needs a connection to "Firefly" in order to attract an audience. It's like we don't have faith in Joss Whedon's ability to write and direct a fantastic movie. I have said it once before and I will say it again Joss Whedon has the ability to write and direct a Firefly movie that can stand on its own two feet. I for one believe that "Serenity" is going to be the best film of 2005, with a lot of critical acclaim and audience acclaim.

We just need a little faith in Joss.

And Gorramit I Love The Title "Serenity".

P.S. Somebody posted on this message board that they talked to a person who does licensing for Universal at a trade show and that person told them that the working title for the film is "Serenity". I'm inclined to believe the post now the Universal has "Serenity" as Coming Soon. Here is the link.

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=3858

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:05 AM

FIREFLYTHEMOVIE

Quote:
Originally posted by outlander:
I find it funny how people seem to think that "Serenity" needs a connection to "Firefly" in order to attract an audience. It's like we don't have faith in Joss Whedon's ability to write and direct a fantastic movie.

No, no, that's not it at all. That's like saying we didn't have faith that he could write and direct a fantastic tv show, that would draw critical acclaim, etc., etc. He did, and many of us had faith that he would long before the first crappy ad for it was aired. And it was, of course, mishandled and mistreated, far more than just the early crappy ads for it, and got canceled way too early. Hence the jadedness and cautious optimism.

Does that mean I'm not doing handsprings over this? Well, yes, but that's only because I can't do handsprings.

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 5:24 AM

MICRONAUT

One thing about this discussion of the title "Serenity" (re: strong or wussy) is that people seem to forget that the ship was named after one of the bloodiest battles of the Alliance-Independant war, the Battle of Serenity Valley. There could be a great many references (not to mention flashback sequences) to this in the movie, more than fulfilling any "action" quotient required by marketing folks to snair the male demographic.

I would not be surprised if Joss wrote something that dealt with the aftermath of that battle directly as part of the core plot of the movie (maybe a revolt against the Alliance by the Browncoat survivors of the battle... ).

"Just remember... all success is illusion: what has really been accomplished is the displacement of an area of specific failure to somewhere else... or is it the other way around?"

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 6:56 AM

GAVIN

Maybe "Serenity" will be ABOUT the battle of Serenity Valley.

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 8:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Micronaut:
One thing about this discussion of the title "Serenity" (re: strong or wussy) is that people seem to forget that the ship was named after one of the bloodiest battles of the Alliance-Independant war, the Battle of Serenity Valley.

Oh, no one is forgeting that. (Are they?) As Noocyte said, they could call it "Platypus Guano" and the fans would still come. It's the new people who have never seen the movie that they want to draw in with the name. "Serenity" only means peace and possibly bladder control to them.

I've heard someone say that the name doesn't matter as long as the trailers are good. While the trailers are of course important, sometimes the name is the only selling point you have.

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 8:02 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by gavin:
Maybe "Serenity" will be ABOUT the battle of Serenity Valley.

I doubt that. Didn't Joss say he was using the movie to wrap up so loose ends? Plus he did say it would be about Reavers, and I don't remember any Reavers at the Battle of Serenity Valley. And then we'd loose most of the cast! Only Mal and Zoe would be in attendance.

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 8:05 AM

DECKROID

First of all: Holy Freakin' Hell, I did it! I sold my soul to the devil and they are making the movie!

Second: Anyone know how to trick the devil?

Thrid: Working Titles are just that ... working titles... here is some trivia for ya...

Rumor had it that the original title for Bill and Ted's Bogus Adventure was 'Bill and Ted Go To Hell', but in reality, the working title was 'Bill and Ted Go to Hell and Party With All of Their Friends and Some Homosexuals and the President'.

All About Eve (1950), was entitled 'Best Performance"

Annie Hall (1977) was 'Anhedonia'

E.T The Extra-Terrestrial (1982) was 'A Boy's Life'

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977) was 'Watch the Skies'

Kelly's Heroes (1970) was 'The Warriors'

License to Kill (1989) was 'License Revoked'

On Deadly Ground (1994) had two! 'Spirit Warrior' and 'Rainbow Warrior'

Pretty Woman (1990) was '$3000'

Tootsie (1982) was 'Would I Lie to You?'

There are tons more, but you get the point. They push out a Working Title and it could change before the movie even hits the streets.

So, we dont have to start freaking out that Firefly is no where to be seen in the title just yet.

I call her "Vera"

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 10:38 AM

LTNOWIS

Quote:
Originally posted by Saint Jayne:
Quote:
Originally posted by gavin:
Maybe "Serenity" will be ABOUT the battle of Serenity Valley.

I doubt that. Didn't Joss say he was using the movie to wrap up so loose ends? Plus he did say it would be about Reavers, and I don't remember any Reavers at the Battle of Serenity Valley. And then we'd loose most of the cast! Only Mal and Zoe would be in attendance.

Actually, he wrote a wrapping-up type script, then Universal said he could write a launching a renewed series-type script, so he rewrote it. At least, that's what I've heard.

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

Sunday, February 22, 2004 11:05 AM