The Other Firefly Movie? by illbeinmybunk

NEWS HEADLINE DISCUSSIONS

The Other Firefly Movie?

POSTED BY: ILLBEINMYBUNK
UPDATED: Thursday, July 22, 2004 11:59
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 9308
PAGE 1 of 1

Wednesday, June 2, 2004 7:58 AM

from scifi.com

Shusett Rebels With 2176

Ron Shusett, co-creator of Alien, and producer Daniel Alter are teaming up to produce 2176, an SF space opera movie offering a retelling of the Revolutionary War, written by Thunder Levin and George Saunders, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The story revolves around 13 planetary colonies in the future that rebel against an oppressive Earth, the trade paper reported.

Alter, through his Alter Ego Entertainment management and production company, has also optioned rights to the Image Comics series Small Gods, which it aims to develop as a television series about people with psychic abilities, the trade paper reported. The company is also developing Spooks, an original pitch by Alter and Ryan Schifrin, which revolves around a government agency that protects mankind from supernatural threats, including vampires, werewolves, witchcraft, ghosts and zombies.

So, first they want to take the history of firefly and make it into a movie. then they want to make a series about river. then they figured out the next buffy spinoff: the Initiative. I wonder if marc blucas is still available. grr

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

Wednesday, June 2, 2004 8:20 AM

CYBERSNARK

Quote:
Originally posted by illbeinmybunk:
The company is also developing Spooks, an original pitch by Alter and Ryan Schifrin, which revolves around a government agency that protects mankind from supernatural threats, including vampires, werewolves, witchcraft, ghosts and zombies.

Not just the Initiative.

Special Unit 2
Roswell Conspiracies
Hellsing (the animé, not the Hugh Jackman movie)

The list goes on.

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

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

Thursday, June 3, 2004 2:11 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by illbeinmybunk:
from scifi.com

Shusett Rebels With 2176

Ron Shusett, co-creator of Alien, and producer Daniel Alter are teaming up to produce 2176, an SF space opera movie offering a retelling of the Revolutionary War, written by Thunder Levin and George Saunders, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The story revolves around 13 planetary colonies in the future that rebel against an oppressive Earth, the trade paper reported.

Wow. That sounds oddly familiar. Colony worlds declaring independence from an oppressive central government, resulting in a war.

Quote:
Alter, through his Alter Ego Entertainment management and production company, has also optioned rights to the Image Comics series Small Gods, which it aims to develop as a television series about people with psychic abilities, the trade paper reported. The company is also developing Spooks, an original pitch by Alter and Ryan Schifrin, which revolves around a government agency that protects mankind from supernatural threats, including vampires, werewolves, witchcraft, ghosts and zombies.

Been done. Several times over. Still, Spooks might be worth checking out if it ever actually makes it to TV.

Quote:
So, first they want to take the history of firefly and make it into a movie. then they want to make a series about river. then they figured out the next buffy spinoff: the Initiative. I wonder if marc blucas is still available. grr

Not very original concepts I agree, but then again, what is? Nearly every show you can think of is based on some theme or another that has been done before. Not all mind you, but a good deal of them.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

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

Thursday, June 3, 2004 2:14 AM

GUNHAND

The supernatural thing reminds me a little of Ultraviolet. I wish HBO would pick that up and run with it, there just wasn't enough of it. Sorta like something else we all know and love.

The revolting against Earth of different colonies has been done quite a bit in Sci-fi, but mostly in books. So it may be interesting, all depends on how they work things through.

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Oh hey, I got an idea. Instead of us hanging
around playing art critic till I get pinched by
the Man, how's about we move away from this
eerie-ass piece of work and get on with our
increasingly eerie-ass day, how's that?"

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

Thursday, June 3, 2004 10:47 AM

DESANGRO

I'm holding out hope for the quality of all of them. Maybe the TV series could be a second sort of non-pointless version of the X-Files...

And I'd definitely be willing to go see the 2176 film, since I love historical, war, and sci-fi films: sounds like it has all the things that I like in one package. Wonder if there will be any neat little pop culture references in it to the Alien series?

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 1:35 PM

YANKSNO1

I'm a little confused. Is this based off of Firefly (the war itself), or another idea that's just (seems like) a rip-off?

Quote:
Originally posted by illbeinmybunk:
... then they figured out the next buffy spinoff: the Initiative. I wonder if marc blucas is still available. grr

Where did you hear this? I'm interested to know.

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 1:40 PM

QUICKSAND

Wait a minute... there's actually a guy out there named THUNDER?!

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 4:35 PM

WALTERPIPP

Not that this makes much difference, but I read that Firefly parallels the American Civil War, whereas this other movie, "2176," parallels the American Revolutionary War. For example, the Battle of Serenity Valley is supposed to parallel the Battle of Gettysburg.

Regardless, what i feel is the biggest draw of Firefly is its late 19th Century, Old American West atmosphere. A space opera loosely based on the American Revolutionary War may not have this same ambiance.

BTW, I think I'm one of the five people in North America who liked Special Unit 2. I'm not completely averse to a new series like it.

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 4:53 PM

DAVCO92

Possibly a little bit of "The Legacy" (supernatural agency) and "Battlestar Galactica" (13 colonies) thrown in to their idea mix too. Not necessarily a bad thing depending on what they do with it, I just thought it worth mentioning for some odd reason.

Burn the land, boil the sea...

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 5:23 PM

RKLENSETH

Quote:
Originally posted by WalterPipp:
Not that this makes much difference, but I read that Firefly parallels the American Civil War, whereas this other movie, "2176," parallels the American Revolutionary War. For example, the Battle of Serenity Valley is supposed to parallel the Battle of Gettysburg.

Regardless, what i feel is the biggest draw of Firefly is its late 19th Century, Old American West atmosphere. A space opera loosely based on the American Revolutionary War may not have this same ambiance.

BTW, I think I'm one of the five people in North America who liked Special Unit 2. I'm not completely averse to a new series like it.

Actually, I'd say that the Battle of Serenity Valley parallels the Battle of Petersburg fought at the closing months of the American Civil War. Yeah, the history textbooks in school will say the turning point was at Gettysburg but that is still debated by scholars of the Civil War today.

But I personally think that Serenity Valley seems more like a Petersburg than Gettysburg. Both had trench warfare. From what I could tell Serenity Valley was in between something the Alliance wanted to get to. Petersburg was in the way of the North getting to Richmond. Serenity Valley seemed to have lasted for months. Petersburg lasted for months of siege like warfare. So I see more similiarities in Petersburg rather than Gettysburg.

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

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:40 PM

WALTERPIPP

I confess to not knowing enough about the American Civil War to argue with you. You're probably correct in your assessment. The information I based my comment on came from:

http://www.mts.net/~arphaxad/firefly.html

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 8:43 PM

QUICKSAND

I don't know where you read that Firefly has anything to do with the Civil War, but I could not disagree more.

The Civil War pitted countryman against countryman, in a 4 year battle in the most grueling of conditions, over the right to own slaves. The slave-holders lost. I think we can all agree this was a good thing.

The Battle for Serenity Valley, and the war it was a part of, seemed to be a battle of the poor vs. the rich, the United-Under-One-Rule vs. We Get To Make Our Own Laws. The conditions, being in the distant future, were quite lovely. No slaves.

Whereas the Southern states were once part of the U.S. before they seceded (and were smacked into returning), I think the parallel here would be the city you leave near annexing the shopping mall near your house, just so they could collect the extra taxes. You, and your fellow Browncoats, are on the side that tells the city to keep their damn mits off your part of this 'Verse.

And a lot fewer cannons.

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

Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:19 PM

SERGEANTX

Quote:
Originally posted by Quicksand:
I don't know where you read that Firefly has anything to do with the Civil War, but I could not disagree more....

Firefly has everything to do with what happens to people who try to revolt and fail. And it follows very closely the plight of a lot of the people who fought for the south and lost. Many of them drifted to the western frontier and took up careers of questionable legality, preferring that to living under the thumb of the Alliance, er,, I mean the North.

Joss has made it clear he was inspired to create Firefly when reading Killer Angels, a book about Gettysburg. That doesn't mean its an allegory. Firefly is its own story, but its clear from the trappings and vernacular borrowed for the show that we're supposed to be reminded of the south and the western frontier of America after the Civil War.

This brings up something else which I see on here a lot that I think is misguided. There's been a fair amount of discussion and even some entertaining fanfic based on the idea that the future of Malcolm Reynolds and crew might involve some kind of rekindling of the war.

I don't think anything is less likely. It goes against nearly every theme the show follows. The story is about Mal, and the rest of them for that matter, trying to figure out how to deal with life when things don't turn out the way you think they should. It's not about fighting the good fight against the oppressive forces of darkness. That's the difference between Star Wars and Firefly. Let Star Wars tell the grand sagas of heroism in battle, Firefly is about heroism of a different sort.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

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

Friday, June 11, 2004 3:01 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Quote:
Originally posted by rklenseth:
Quote:
Originally posted by WalterPipp:
Not that this makes much difference, but I read that Firefly parallels the American Civil War, whereas this other movie, "2176," parallels the American Revolutionary War. For example, the Battle of Serenity Valley is supposed to parallel the Battle of Gettysburg.

Regardless, what i feel is the biggest draw of Firefly is its late 19th Century, Old American West atmosphere. A space opera loosely based on the American Revolutionary War may not have this same ambiance.

BTW, I think I'm one of the five people in North America who liked Special Unit 2. I'm not completely averse to a new series like it.

Actually, I'd say that the Battle of Serenity Valley parallels the Battle of Petersburg fought at the closing months of the American Civil War. Yeah, the history textbooks in school will say the turning point was at Gettysburg but that is still debated by scholars of the Civil War today.

But I personally think that Serenity Valley seems more like a Petersburg than Gettysburg. Both had trench warfare. From what I could tell Serenity Valley was in between something the Alliance wanted to get to. Petersburg was in the way of the North getting to Richmond. Serenity Valley seemed to have lasted for months. Petersburg lasted for months of siege like warfare. So I see more similiarities in Petersburg rather than Gettysburg.

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

I could not agree more Rklenseth. To me the Battle of Serenity Valley more closely resemble the Siege of Petersburg than the Battle of Gettysburg. As you pointed out, Petersburg was under siege and was the first use of trench warfare. To me this makes it more of a parallel to Serenity Valley.

Though Firefly's Battle of Serenity Valley seems to mirror the War Between the States Battle of Gettysburg as the "pivotal" battle for that particular conflict, the comparison, in my opinion, ends there.

WalterPipp wrote:

Quote:
BTW, I think I'm one of the five people in North America who liked Special Unit 2. I'm not completely averse to a new series like it.

You were not the only one my friend. I really liked that show. It was campy, but fun nonetheless.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

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

Friday, June 11, 2004 3:33 AM

MANTICHORUS

Quote:
Originally posted by Gunhand:
The supernatural thing reminds me a little of Ultraviolet. I wish HBO would pick that up and run with it, there just wasn't enough of it. Sorta like something else we all know and love.

~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
"Oh hey, I got an idea. Instead of us hanging
around playing art critic till I get pinched by
the Man, how's about we move away from this
eerie-ass piece of work and get on with our
increasingly eerie-ass day, how's that?"

Good to find another Ultraviolet fan on site.

-------------------------------------------
"BADGER: You think you're better than other people.
MAL: Just the ones I'm better than."
-------------------------------------
"MAL: Gotta say, doctor, your talent for alienatin' folk is near miraculous.
SIMON: Yes, I'm very proud."

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

Monday, June 14, 2004 2:37 AM

SILVERCROSS

Personally I reckon I'd rather pay to watch Serenity twice at the cinema than go see the other (a bit too similar) film. (JW will have the better script anyway....)

Jayne: "Pain is scary" (serenity)

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

Sunday, June 27, 2004 10:09 PM

NEWSCAPER

I don't think a successful rebellion, refighting the last war with Independents winning is in the cards ... too much simplistic been there, done that.

What WOULD be very interesting is some other former browncoats trying to stir something up again and trying to convince/lure/trick Mal & co. into helping -- and Mal being conflicted, realizing (perhaps latter rather than sooner) all it would do is get people killed to no good end and only result in greater oppression by the Alliance. I think he hates the Aliiance, but realizes that they are *not* quite Nazi-class.

A great SF novel that explores this theme is When Heaven Fell by William Barton, in which a former soldier who fought for Earth and is now a reluctant mercenary for its successful conquerors, must decide whether or not to help a new human rebellion that he knows cannot win.

The other SF trope we will never see in Firefly is aliens. Goes too much against the grain of the show -- realistic humanity. That said, like the alternate take on rebels I discuss above, I think this could still be mined. In a TV series format, I think some sort of hijinks -- or bad stuff -- could be developed out of a struggle over a hot cargo that turned out to be a *real* alien artifact, just millions of years old so no chance of live aliens. Or it could just be a convincing fraud.

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

Wednesday, July 7, 2004 1:48 PM

MAUGWAI

Quote:
Originally posted by Quicksand:
I don't know where you read that Firefly has anything to do with the Civil War, but I could not disagree more.

The Civil War pitted countryman against countryman, in a 4 year battle in the most grueling of conditions, over the right to own slaves. The slave-holders lost. I think we can all agree this was a good thing.

The Battle for Serenity Valley, and the war it was a part of, seemed to be a battle of the poor vs. the rich, the United-Under-One-Rule vs. We Get To Make Our Own Laws. The conditions, being in the distant future, were quite lovely. No slaves.

Whereas the Southern states were once part of the U.S. before they seceded (and were smacked into returning), I think the parallel here would be the city you leave near annexing the shopping mall near your house, just so they could collect the extra taxes. You, and your fellow Browncoats, are on the side that tells the city to keep their damn mits off your part of this 'Verse.

And a lot fewer cannons.

Dude, remember there are Southerners on this site. Not that I'm advocating the second rise of the Confederacy or anything, and I certainly don't fly the Confederate flag, but there's more to the story than slavery. It's an issue, but not the only one. I don't really want to argue about it because that's an old argument, but I just wanted to point out that there are more issues at hand than just slavery. So if you look at some of the other issues, they may have more bearing on the Firefly storyline.

Independent states' rights, control over crop prices, one group having more power than another, peer pressure - all these are also causes of the Civil War. Since we don't know about exactly what caused the war in Firefly, all these are also possible issues.

Also, in "Shindig" Mal talks to a slave trader. So I wouldn't completely discount slavery either.

"Dear diary, today I was pompous and my sister was crazy."

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

Wednesday, July 7, 2004 2:15 PM

THUNDAR

The Civil was was NOT fought for the sole reason of Slavery. I think this article explains things quite nicely. http://ngeorgia.com/history/why.html

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

Wednesday, July 7, 2004 2:34 PM

QUICKSAND

Doesn't matter that Mal talked to a slave trader; the arguement isn't, Does Slavery Exist (in the Firefly universe), the issue is, What Was the War About?

The Civil War analogy made above was just silly, and that's all I was pointing out. If anything, it's closer to the American Revolution, where the states wanted to make their own laws and not be taxed into oblivion. Remember the references on "Firefly" about the Alliance dropping settlers on a planet with just a few blankets and some horses? That's all the British government did... remember, these were citizens who had never farmed in their lives, and wore tights and powdered wigs all day.

Britain taxed the colonies, Britain said you MUST open your home to any British soldier who needs a place to stay. The colonists had NO say in the British government.

The South had plenty of say in Washington. I reckon it was about half. They just wouldn't back down (as they refused to back down in 1776), because their entire economy was based on slave labor.

So maybe it wasn't about slavery. But the American Revolution was about freedom, definitely. The Civil War, then, was just all about greed.

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

Thursday, July 8, 2004 9:23 AM

MER

Somehow this movie is trying to compete with Firefly. Much like many movies being scripted at a time and end up competeing. I don't have any examples of this though.

I know this isn't going to work and they'll end up getting sued for using Joss's ideas. But if this movie is ACTUALLY good, then I'll see Serenity many times before seeing THAT movie.

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

Thursday, July 8, 2004 10:33 AM

DANFAN

My concern with any new creative initiative from SciFi channel is the gallons of bilge they have pumped out lately. It seems like their idea of creativity lately is a weak story with weak acting and a couple of SGI workstations to animate a CGI critter.

Hope springs eternal, though...

As for "The civil war was all about greed."

That seems simplistic. "State's rights" is about freedom. Some of the rights that my state wanted back then were evil (and clearly anti-freedom for significant segments of the population). That just helps to illustrate that the root causes of the war were WAY more complex than a you can capture in a 7 word sentence.

This whole topic was intensely personal to my grandmother. It has never touched any strings in my heart... it's just ancient history. But I swear, I've never seen comments like that from a contemporary before. Thank God most of the population has moved beyond the need to continue assigning blame.

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

Thursday, July 8, 2004 10:33 AM

STATIC

Actually. . .

One of the big issues for what we southern gentlemen refer to as "The Great Unpleasantness" WAS individual state's rights. The Confederates imagined their nation being a group of joined "Nation-States". . .which is one of the reasons they were called "The Confederate States of America." Separate, yet equal. The union had serious issues with this, some practical, some principal.. .and the slavery issue, some historians will argue, was only thrown into the mix to build up some public outrage in the North. Good ol' politics.

So the Alliance/Independants war is much closer to the American Civil war, if you remember those details.

The BIG problem here is. . .few of us can truly be sure WHAT was going on with the "War of Northern Agression" for two reasons.

1. None of us were THERE
2. History is written by the winners.

So. . .speculate away.

==================================================
"Wash. . .we got some local color happening. A grand entrance would not go amiss."

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

Thursday, July 8, 2004 1:04 PM

QUICKSAND

Quote:

This whole topic was intensely personal to my grandmother. It has never touched any strings in my heart... it's just ancient history. But I swear, I've never seen comments like that from a contemporary before. Thank God most of the population has moved beyond the need to continue assigning blame.

Whose comments? Mine? What did I say? I don't want to be misconstrued here.

It was silly of me to write my more recent response anyway, because the arguement here isn't about the politics of the U.S. Civil War (which we all agree were complex and fierce), but rather, Saying Firefly Is Reminiscent of the Civil War is Incorrect.

Revolutionary War I'll buy. Both involved colonists who were battling against an oppressive World (Galaxy) power. Later on, the U.S. Northern States were poor, stepped on, and in danger of collapsing and being re-taken by the Brits.

Hardly the same thing.

View "The Unpleasantness" any way you wish, but this thread has gone on way too long. I've said my piece.

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

Wednesday, July 21, 2004 6:01 PM

LTNOWIS

Quote:
The colonists had NO say in the British government.

Weren't us Americans offered seats in Parliamant, but we denied them as our votes wouldn't have made a difference? Also, we had it better than most British colonies, tax and autonomy-wise. I don't hate America, but I think I would have been a Loyalist.

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

Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:26 PM

QUICKSAND

Lots of people were Loyalists. Benjamin Franklin's kids, for example. Whom he disowned.

No, we were not offered seats in Parliament; we were not offered seats of any kind. Hence, "No Taxation Without Representation."

The Brits were all about the tradition-- this is why they did and still do have a King or Queen. If you're Lord of Stephon Marbury, or whatever your title is, it's because your father held that title, and his father held that title, and his father and his father, all the way back to the dawn of time. So in 18th century England, if you were Lord of Beantown, and Beantown had eroded and fallen into the Atlantic 50 years before, it didn't MATTER. You had a certificate that said you were Lord of Beantown, and therefore, you got a seat in Parliament. And damned if you're going to give up your Seat for some upstart, uncivilized colonist.

I just caught "1776" on TV the other week, which is a musical comedy made in, like, 1972. And even though it's a comedy, it amuses me to see representatives of the colonies saying things like, Don't question our leadership, that's unpatriotic and treasonous.

Some things just do not change.

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

Wednesday, July 21, 2004 8:40 PM

RECHELON

Quote:
Originally posted by LtNOWIS:
I don't hate America, but I think I would have been a Loyalist.

...and I would have been the one plugging your ass full of misshapen lead balls. No offence. The revolution was about more than just lower taxes.

Granted, if I was around, I would have probably proceeded to gun for Washington and the other assholes who tried to ruin things.

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

Thursday, July 22, 2004 11:59 AM

LTNOWIS

Quote:
Lots of people were Loyalists. Benjamin Franklin's kids, for example. Whom he disowned.

Also, Thomas Edison's ancestors, who fled to Canada.

Maybe I would've been a Patriot, now that I think about it. I do enjoy whining about the government, and having freedoms. But I usually don't get swept up in things the majority supports. Though I can't really know, as I wasn't there.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER

POST DATE