Loved Firefly, but Serenity *sucked* (SPOLIERS)
POSTED BY: Jusl89
UPDATED: Friday, December 16, 2005 22:26
VIEWED: 39124
PAGE 1 of 2
Serenity was a big dissappointment for me. I'm going to list in decending order what dissappointed me the most:
1. Wash's death. Thanks Joss Whedon, for making me lose all interest in seeing any possible sequels or series revivals again. I can't imagine Firefly without Wash. He was a great part of the heart and soul of the series, and without him, there is no Firefly. There was no reason for him to die, and even the way he died was ridiculous. Wash's death prevented me from enjoying the ending of the movie. So great, they dealt a wound to the Alliance. Too bad the strength of the series wasn't about them fighting the Alliance or the Reavers, but was about the great characters and the character interactions. Wash's death was a result of trying to artifically increase tension in an action sequence, and what a waste it was.
2. The Simon-Jayne-Mal interaction. In Serenity, Jayne and Simon were acting like Ariel never happened, and that Simon never had that talk with Jayne in the episode "Trash". In fact, Simon acts like "Safe" never happened, and doesn't have Mal's trust. This made the Simon in Serenity seem alien to me, and I didn't see him as the same Simon in Firefly.
3. Book's death. I hated this for many of the same reason's as Wash's death. Book didn't need to die.
4. Too much action. The best episodes of Firefly were NOT action filled. Granted, seeing the Reaver ships fight the Alliance was awesome, but the rest of the action sequences were tired. River beating everyone up with martial arts? Everyone knew she would win, there was no excitement in it. And how the hell did Mal know to pretend to freeze up when the Operative hit him with the nerve strike? Didn't make sense.
5. Mal didn't kill the Operative? So the Operative kills all of Mals friends, kills Book, and leads to the death of Wash, and yet he walks away? If there ever was a use for a death, this would be it.
6. Jayne would not agree to go on a philanthropic "save the world" mission. This was way out of character. He didn't even ask what the payoff would be.
7. Ending secret was lame. So the Alliance created the Reavers? I've heard the same premise from worse sci-fi stories. And given the police state that the Alliance is, I woulnd't see how knowing that the Alliance created the Reavers would significantly weaken them.
8. Ending was a net loss. Mal lost alot at the end. The extent to how the Alliance was weakened was vague and uninteresting, without anything susbstnatial to show for all their efforts. In fact, most of the movie was directionless.
9. Not enough Inara. In Serenity, it wasn't even explained what she did or why she was on the ship. And at the end she is firing a bow and arrow? What the hell is that?
I could go on, but I'm tired. In my mind, Serenity never happened.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, Jus, every last one of your points is pretty obvious to me. When I saw Buffy for the first time after seeing Firefly I wondered, "How could the same guy create both these shows?" After Serenity, I wondered the same thing.
Just rewatched The Message. They created more pathos from one scene and a tape recorded message than Serenity generated over the whole movie. What was up with those goofy hologram topped grave markers?
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
while i'd like to get into a lengthy post disagreeing with a lot of what you said, but also agreeing with some, I can't. i'm a college student and i have to be up in 3 hours for a mid-term. so i'll just state a short obvious: there are some things that had to be changed between characters to bring it to the big screen. if Joss hadn't, he would have been alienating the potential audience who aren't familiar with Firefly. sorry, i'd really like to elaborate(sp?) more, but when i write about things related to the Firefly 'Verse, i get too passionate, and that means i get to lengthy, and i need sleep. but i'll check in tomorrow afternoon hopefully. sorry.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I love[d] 'Firefly' and there were parts of 'Serenity' that I really enjoyed. But there were a couple of chunks of the film that simply reinforced in me why there's fanfic.
In my 'verse, Wash isn't dead and I'm stickin' to it. Just the way it has to be for me. Book I can sorta deal with – the jury isn’t totally in on that yet, but Wash? No way, Jose! Without him, it’s just not the ‘verse I signed on for.
But that’s okay. Everyone’s got their own point of view on the subject. And like I said, that’s why there’s fan fic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Rimcat:
But that’s okay. Everyone’s got their own point of view on the subject. And like I said, that’s why there’s fan fic.
If everyone was this magnanimous with their own point of view we would be living in a far nicer world than we are!
extremely dimensionally transcendental
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Emma:Quote:
Originally posted by Rimcat:
But that’s okay. Everyone’s got their own point of view on the subject. And like I said, that’s why there’s fan fic.
If everyone was this magnanimous with their own point of view we would be living in a far nicer world than we are!
extremely dimensionally transcendental
Thank ya kindly.
No other way it *can* be, really. I can't make someone change their mind about something, all I can do is say why I feel a certain way and let them pick and choose from what I said.
Besides, I'm been part of another fandom that's *really* polarized about some issues. I certainly don't want to have that sort of stuff here in this 'verse.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's a shame that you were disappointed, but I don't agree with much of what you cite.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
1. Wash's death. Thanks Joss Whedon, for making me lose all interest in seeing any possible sequels or series revivals again. I can't imagine Firefly without Wash. He was a great part of the heart and soul of the series, and without him, there is no Firefly. There was no reason for him to die, and even the way he died was ridiculous. Wash's death prevented me from enjoying the ending of the movie. So great, they dealt a wound to the Alliance. Too bad the strength of the series wasn't about them fighting the Alliance or the Reavers, but was about the great characters and the character interactions. Wash's death was a result of trying to artifically increase tension in an action sequence, and what a waste it was.
There's nothing artificial about the increase in tension. After Book died I thought 'hey, maybe one death will be enough for Joss', so when Wash died the stakes were raised even higher. The ensuing corridor battle then sees Zoe, Jayne, Kaylee and Simon all getting hurt, and as each injury builds up to Simon getting shot you really get a sense that maybe no one (or at least very few of them) is coming out of there alive. If everyone had survived, all credibility for the seriousness of the situation is lost.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
2. The Simon-Jayne-Mal interaction. In Serenity, Jayne and Simon were acting like Ariel never happened, and that Simon never had that talk with Jayne in the episode "Trash". In fact, Simon acts like "Safe" never happened, and doesn't have Mal's trust. This made the Simon in Serenity seem alien to me, and I didn't see him as the same Simon in Firefly.
Months have passed between the end of Firefly and the beginning of the film. Due to the wonders of cancellation we may never know everything that happened in the that time, but given how much relationships changed over the course of the series, it's logical to assume that period was also change-filled. In fact, it would be pretty ridiculous to assume everyone went into stasis at the end of Firefly and all relationships are exactly as they were when the series ended.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
3. Book's death. I hated this for many of the same reason's as Wash's death. Book didn't need to die.
Of course he did - the crew needed to experience that horror to push them on towards Miranda. Having said that, I think the manner of his death could have been vastly improved. The 'deliver vital message with last breath' thing is a bit tired.
Another thing to think about on the topic of death is if Wash and Book hadn't died, who would you prefer to have died in their places? The answer is no one, because Joss makes you care about each and every one of these characters. Of course, if seeing beloved characters die is too much for you then maybe you shouldn't be watching anything from the Whedon stable...
Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
4. Too much action. The best episodes of Firefly were NOT action filled. Granted, seeing the Reaver ships fight the Alliance was awesome, but the rest of the action sequences were tired. River beating everyone up with martial arts? Everyone knew she would win, there was no excitement in it. And how the hell did Mal know to pretend to freeze up when the Operative hit him with the nerve strike? Didn't make sense.
Serenity is a sci-fi action movie. Joss would never have been able to sell Objects In Space 2, as cool as that might have been. Action movies need action, and, though I do partially agree with the point about River's fights, I think all the other action sequences were both well paced and well executed, given budget constraints. I don't think I've ever tire of that space battle.
Mal knew to freeze up because he knew that the nerve cluster was there. How did he know? Because, as he said, he'd had it removed following some war wound or other.
Quote:
Originally posted by
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well argued, Grounded.
"My God - you're like a trained ape. Without the training."
"Come a day there won't be room for naughty men like us to slip about at all..."
I know the secret.
http://www.theshadowdepository.co.uk/index.htm
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hypothetically, consider the reaction in the US to a revelation that the terrorists who struck on 9/11 were directly created and supported by the CIA.
Originally posted by Grounded:Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
7. Ending secret was lame. So the Alliance created the Reavers? I've heard the same premise from worse sci-fi stories. And given the police state that the Alliance is, I woulnd't see how knowing that the Alliance created the Reavers would significantly weaken them.
It's not a police state at all. And it's not so much the creation of the Reavers that matters as it is the cover up of planetary genocide.
Please understand that I am not suggesting that this was true! But if it were, there would be a massive impact on public opinion -- even more so if the US government had been denying the existence of terrorists all along. The reaction within the Alliance would be similar.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree w/ Reflexive, great counterpoints to Jusl89's comments. Very much along the lines of what I was formulating when I read the beginning post in this thread.
Quote:
Originally posted by Grounded:
I didn't get the bow and arrow either, and it was a shame she didn't get much attention. Having said that, I'm not sure how Joss could have worked her into the story since she doesn't really have a lot to do with it. I'd rather have had her in it than not at all.
I am assuming that the bow Inara used is a weapon that she is very proficient with, hence the reason she chose it over a firearm. Considering the fact that she is a Companion schooled in many arts to move in the social circles of the Core planets it stands to reason that archery might still be hobby of the wealthy or elite. A bow in my thinking is a more graceful weapon & one I could see someone of Inara's grace preferring to a handgun.
__________________________________________
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Fans:
http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/richmondbrowncoats/
http://www.richmondbrowncoats.org
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gotta argue with you on one point:
Quote:
6. Jayne would not agree to go on a philanthropic "save the world" mission. This was way out of character. He didn't even ask what the payoff would be.
There was no payoff for Jayne in rescuing Mal and Wash in War Stories. Jayne lives in the 'verse, and the Reavers are often a threat to his life and livelihood. They may also have killed someone near and dear to him. I can see him getting pissed at who created them.
To enjoy the flavor of life, take big bites. Moderation is for monks. --Robt. Heinlein
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well argued indeed!
You said everything I wanted to say back.
Just a note about Jayne. I think Jayne made a decision to follow Mal after Ariel. That convinced him Mal was worthy of his loyalty. And by asking him not to tell the others he gave away his feeling of family for them all. Jayne was as roped in as the rest of them to the destiny they all shared on this mission.
FollowMal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
the crew needed to experience that horror to push them on towards Miranda.
I agree with Grounded here and would further argue that Book's death was actually the device that restored Mal's "belief in something." Actually, I agree with all of Grounded's points.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The problem I see with all these refutations of our disappointment is that they hinge on the idea that Joss somehow had to tell the story he told. He didn't. An artist has choices. Y'all say he had to change the story to make a movie, which may be true, but it doesn't mean he had to change the story in the manner he changed it. In another thread, I mentioned Batman Begins as a highly successful, cerebral, character driven action movie that made big, big bucks. To say that Joss had to make a popcorn movie just ain't so.
The huge problem with the "increase in tention" caused by Wash's death is that even the people who defend Joss's decision were taken out of the story by that event! Everyone is suddenly thrust into a meta-narrative of WWJD (what would Joss do?). We're not thinking about how our BDH's are going to deal with a specific problem in the story, we're thinking about how they're gonna deal with Joss Almighty. Aesthetically, killing Wash is nothing but a power trip, and only those of us who are obsessed with Joss's power (the hardcore fans) care. If he told a better story we'd all be thinking about what's happening to the characters in character terms, not hardcore fan terms. It's a huge error in judgement and a betrayal of the powerful sense of reality the show so effortlessly gave us week after week.
That Jayne's and Simon's relationship would evolve over several months is reasonable, but Joss didn't have to start the story so long after Objects in Space. More importantly, from a story standpoint, the changes should show some kind of logical progression--just saying "a lot can happen in seven months" is a cop-out. Joss was building a very specific kind of tention, with very specific and deep seated issues between these two characters. To simply replace it with a more expedient relationship is a betrayal of the story.
One thing though: I said I agreed with all of Jus's points, but I don't agree about Mal not killing the Operative. To the degree that the Mal of the movie holds any continuity with the Mal of the series, I bought it. Because Mal is not a hardass moral machine, he is a supple and surprising real human being with an amazing moral instinct. I'd say he was well aware of all the Operative had done, just as he figured out all of Jayne's actions on Ariel. Mal was able to rise out of the mechanism of revenge long enough to see a better way. That's the Mal I know and love, thru and thru.
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The problem I see with all these refutations of our disappointment is that they hinge on the idea that Joss somehow had to tell the story he told. He didn't. An artist has choices. Y'all say he had to change the story to make a movie, which may be true, but it doesn't mean he had to change the story in the manner he changed it. In another thread, I mentioned Batman Begins as a highly successful, cerebral, character driven action movie that made big, big bucks. To say that Joss had to make a popcorn movie just ain't so.
Much as I like Batman Begins, it descends into a fairly pedestrian final sequence.
Movies and TV series have different pacing requirements. Genre films are action films by definition because if its a story about 9 people living their lives, you can make Short Cuts/Magnolia etc for a fraction of the cost using real world locations.
There ain't nothing wrong with Pocorn movies - BB was a popcorn movie, Star Wars was a pop corn movie, Jaws was a pop corn movie.
Quote:
Aesthetically, killing Wash is nothing but a power trip, and only those of us who are obsessed with Joss's power (the hardcore fans) care. If he told a better story we'd all be thinking about what's happening to the characters in character terms, not hardcore fan terms. It's a huge error in judgement and a betrayal of the powerful sense of reality the show so effortlessly gave us week after week.
At its base level, every word a writer puts on the page is a "power trip". Killing Wash was what Joss decided the story needed - it set up the stakes for the final sequence. For me, after that, I wasn't convinced that anyone would make it out. I'm sorry you didn't agree with the choice, and that's your right, but I don't think it can be classed as a betrayal at any level.
Quote:
To simply replace it with a more expedient relationship is a betrayal of the story.
How was the relationship "expedient"? The film doesn't say that Jayne and Simon trust each other - they do however at that moment share a common cause.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I didn't get the bow and arrow either
Read here somewhere there's a deleted scene where the bow makes a guest appearance in the trunk Inara left in her shuttle.
DVD good, bring soon!
I mostly agree with what Grounded says. The movie needed to be this big, fast and hard for it to work at all. I didn't expect Joss to kill anyone (how'd I manage that being a big fan?).
Jus, please see if you can get yourself to go see it again. I know that must sound like torture, I wasn't sure I could watch Wash's death again. Bring someone who hasn't seen Firefly. That might really change your mind about the whole thing.
"Bright 'n shiny capt'n, not to fret."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Sucked" is too strong a word.
Maybe you thnk it could have been different -- I wouddl bet Joss would say the same thing at this point.
But to say it "sucked" is like throwing the baby away with the bathwater.
I cannot express how exciting it was to see our chicken-shaped spacecraft fly across the big screen! WHOO-HOO!!!!
Warts and all, I will forever rejoice gladly that Serenity made it to the big screen.
And yes, I want MORE MORE MORE!!!!
All you Serenity naysayers and "shouda-beeners" are just "big dam weenie-baits" IMHO.
Serenity needs our support, not our sniping.
Keep flyin,
MaTwang
"Carnivale -- it's not a show, it's a drug."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Hypothetically, consider the reaction in the US to a revelation that the terrorists who struck on 9/11 were directly created and supported by the CIA.
I wouldn't say supported exactly, but seeing as how Osama Bin Laden was trained by the US to fight the Russians guerrilla-style in Afghanistan, this is pretty much what happened....
And for the record, I don't agree with pretty much any of the criticism against the BDM in this thread. I thought it was a wonderful, magnificent ending (?) to a great series, and every death was earned in full. However, I fully support your right to feel the way you feel about it - I'm just sorry the movie didn't fill you with joy as it did me.
"I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care. Or indeed, why it should be necessary to prove it at all." -Kerr Avon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jus,
Welcome to the *I disliked it* camp. There are quite a few of us that were disappointed for some of the same reasons you pointed out.
It has been argued a lot in other threads so I won't go into the same detail again.
"There is nothing more American than insulting people who do not share your opinions"
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Jus - for more *I disliked it* POV's.
Oops, meant to paste the links to the previous threads. So, if you would like to read more on this subject - here you go:
http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13640#189666
http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=12689#182582
http://fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13372#188332
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I see your points and raise a few....
I believe that Mal did not kill the operative , because that would have killed what was left of his crew. He had a mission he was on and was willing to die for it. ( I do agree that the final secret could have been better, but now we know what the Reavers are and how they came to be) Also in the end it would have been suicide to kill the Operative cause frankly, they were surrounded but good and in need of a lot of medical help. wait to bite the hand that's feedin' ya till your in a better situation, and you can get away.
I too am upset at Books death as I REALLY wanted to dig into his past, but I guess that still can be done.
I thought the dynamics of the original 9 were perfect, and that included the marriage of Wash/ Zoe and the older wiser preacher. This will give opportunity to bring in a big name for part 2. We fans don't need a name but I've read reviews that state if might have helped get newbies in.
I also heard that Wash's death made the audience realize that anyone could go. I personally would not have killed him off but I've also heard that Alan (who plays Wash) had commitments and couldn't be in part 2-3.
As far as Capt'n not trusting Jayne, he had to put that behind him, he hired him knowing full well what he was and that he has no loyality, but you always can hope someone will change. I for pne feel that Jayne did see the light. He's got to realize that his crew cares for him and I think he's starting to care for them. He's warming up. Cappy has to trust him. deal with the consequences as they happen. kinda like letting your kids drive off in your car , not only the first time, but for the first months.you just gotta cross your fingers and go about your life.
Inara, yea, I agree she was frosting in this one. BUT as a fan, I was SOOOO happy to see her back with Mal. I want their relationship to flourish. I think they could at the very least be great friends. He needs her knowledged and care, she needs his strenght and love. and she knows the bow and arrow, sword and martial arts, in firefly they explain she is well versed in defense.
Action, you gotta have it for the newbies, and all the people who give you the money to make a film, in the movie business, everyone even remotely associated with it wants to tell their friends that THEY came up with THAT idea. I used to be in animation, people's brother's mother's got to say what should be in our movies and when we (the artists) said something wasn't gonna work, no one listened. It's the execs, they always have to have their finger in the pie. sometimes it's good, sometimes it's bad.
you just gotta deal.
but I hope you give part 2 a chance to see if Joss answers any of your questions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The problem I see with all these refutations of our disappointment is that they hinge on the idea that Joss somehow had to tell the story he told. He didn't. An artist has choices. Y'all say he had to change the story to make a movie, which may be true, but it doesn't mean he had to change the story in the manner he changed it. In another thread, I mentioned Batman Begins as a highly successful, cerebral, character driven action movie that made big, big bucks. To say that Joss had to make a popcorn movie just ain't so.
I do believe that Serenity is pretty close to what the 2nd season of Firefly would have been were it still on the air. Joss himself said that when he first wrote the script & it wound being too long it was because he tried to cram all he wanted from the 2nd season into the script. He did a rewrite to make it short enough to fit into the two hour time frame of the movie, but I believe the core of the movie was still where the 2nd season of the tv series would have taken us.
Both Alan Tudyk & Joss have mentioned that Wash would have most likely died before the end of the second season of the series, so why is his death in the movie any different. If Joss, Alan & the cast are okay w/ his death & the way it was done, why can't we the fans accept it?
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The huge problem with the "increase in tention" caused by Wash's death is that even the people who defend Joss's decision were taken out of the story by that event! Everyone is suddenly thrust into a meta-narrative of WWJD (what would Joss do?). We're not thinking about how our BDH's are going to deal with a specific problem in the story, we're thinking about how they're gonna deal with Joss Almighty. Aesthetically, killing Wash is nothing but a power trip, and only those of us who are obsessed with Joss's power (the hardcore fans) care. If he told a better story we'd all be thinking about what's happening to the characters in character terms, not hardcore fan terms. It's a huge error in judgement and a betrayal of the powerful sense of reality the show so effortlessly gave us week after week.
I'm sorry, but I don't think the death of either Wash or Book was part of any "power trip" on the part of Joss. In both Buffy & Angel we have seen that Joss is willing to kill of characters in order to further develop affected characters or pursue the development of his story. Why should Serenity be any different? Anyone that knows Joss knows that not all the characters are safe. Why should they be? Why should their reality be any different from our own where people die or are killed when placed into dangerous situations?
It is my belief that Wash and very likely Book would have died in the 2nd season of Firefly had it remained on television. The movie is the story Joss intended to convey on tv, but never got the chance to tell us. Not everyone will like the way the story goes, but you can't please everyone.
I don't agree that Joss "betrayed" us or made an "error in judgement" w/ the way he told the story. I respect your opinion & how you feel, but I do not agree.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
That Jayne's and Simon's relationship would evolve over several months is reasonable, but Joss didn't have to start the story so long after Objects in Space. More importantly, from a story standpoint, the changes should show some kind of logical progression--just saying "a lot can happen in seven months" is a cop-out. Joss was building a very specific kind of tention, with very specific and deep seated issues between these two characters. To simply replace it with a more expedient relationship is a betrayal of the story.
I do not see how the Jayne/Simon dynamic was unbelievable. Jayne & Simon were beginning to come to an understanding of sorts after the events in "Trash". Simon confronted Jayne over his betrayal on Ariel, but he also le
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I have to disagree. Many of these points are well stated and valid, but I also concur that even if it wasn't what you were looking for, sucked is too strong. Mr. Mom sucked. Maybe Matrix 2 sucked. Possibly even Alien 3.
I don't mean this as an attack or a trolling counter, but as an attempt to explain possible answers to your problems with the film, in hopes you might be able to see it again without loathing.
1. Wash needed to die. I liked him to. Wash was one of my favorite characters. But I don't disagree with Joss' decision to remove him. Joss kills characters if their death adds more than their continued existance. It's all for the story. Without Wash the show does change. Joss wanted it to change, to make it darked, less spoofy. Trust in Joss. Sometimes he'll screw up, like leaving season 7 of buffy to marti noxon.
2. Simon has nothing against Jayne. Simon is an extreme pragmatist. It's a philosophy that leaves no room for personal vendetta.
3. Book was probably removed for a similar reason as Wash, or maybe this was an issue with the actor. I know in an interview Ron Glass made no bones about not liking science fiction. Maybe he had something else he wanted to do. If anyone knows the answer, please post it. For me, I found Book's moral superiority hard to take, but I know Joss doesn't care whether I like a character, only is that character serves the story.
4. A movie is either action or contemplation. Since Joss has the whole show for contemplation, there's little to be gained by a movie more of it. This was intended as a dose of action. Thank you Joss, much appreciated.
5. I don't know why Joss doesn't kill villains, maybe he wants to reuse them or prove that heros are different. If someone has theories, post them.
6. Jayne states his opposition to a plan, but doesn't hold out. It's very different, he's not uncooperative, he's dissent. Good dissent makes its case, and when losing, joins the fight as best as possible.
7. I don't think it would weaken the alliance, but it will make it easier for Mal and Co to gain allies. There's still a lot of fight ahead.
8. I think the movie was primarily a change of direction for the crew. In the series, they were running away. Now they have decided to turn and fight. The movie was largely about this transition. So nothing was particularly gained, but the transferance within the characters occured, and this was the point. Future firefly will be different.
9. I don't know about Inara. I find her tremendously uninteresting. At worst, she's like a baywatch character: Eye candy that whines. I admit she's hot, but if I want to just look at hot girls there are many programs for that, and they won't whine and bitch. Inara's feeling of superiority is also a problem for me. This was something that bothered me about Book. I don't like self important folk who think they're better than everyone else. But that's just me. But in the show, Inara really didn't help that much, and got our guys into trouble. I think as a character she needs a lot more development for me to care whether she gets skewered by a docking clamp.
I agree the holo-graves made me uneasy. Cartoon tragedy always falls flat.
On a side argument here, I had something to say about Osama Bin Laden.
OBL was not "created" by the CIA. Sure, they assisted him, but he was already fighting a war. I'm not at all sure that OBL had anything to do with 9/11. He claimed credit for it 3 years later. That's very unlike a terrorist. Terrorists gain power by getting credit, and here was one where everyone was throwing credit his way, and he wasn't taking it. This is not a defense of Osama Bin Laden, who is a psycho. It's just intended to raise a little doubt.
I'm not sure that I buy either sides story. On the one hand, OBL single handed action, hijacks planes, that knocks down buildings. On the other side, US plots the whole thing from within.
I don't like the standard explanation because I think it defies physics. I'm fairly certain that two planes flying into the world trade centers would not c
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by FollowMal:
Well argued indeed!
You said everything I wanted to say back.
Just a note about Jayne. I think Jayne made a decision to follow Mal after Ariel. That convinced him Mal was worthy of his loyalty. And by asking him not to tell the others he gave away his feeling of family for them all. Jayne was as roped in as the rest of them to the destiny they all shared on this mission.
FollowMal
They killed Book! Jayne's buddy died because of this mess. Mal aside, Book was who Jayne was closest to. Why wouldn't he go along with them? Also, crew = family. Read the novel version, they explain a lot of the motives for why every character did what they did.
Also, as far as the title on this thread goes, remember what Joss said about "quiet reflection" if you didn't like the movie? That means stfu till it's out of the theatres so that it has a chance to do well. Fans are a blessing and a curse.
-------------------
"Let's move this conversation in a not-Jayne's-fault direction." - Jayne
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Idrawart, where did you work in animation? I used to work at DreamWorks Animation, and the situation you describe sounds very much like the events I witnessed there. (I'm now at Klasky-Csupo.)
"I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care. Or indeed, why it should be necessary to prove it at all." -Kerr Avon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I was with Disney for 15 years, in EFX. Good for you still in the business, you do traditional or Maya?
I'm working in live action efx ( puppets) at the moment, but it's freelance, no bennies. it's a lot of fun and all the stuff hanging around the studio is cool.
what are you on.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I was a production supervisor at DW (APM, in Disney terms!), and now produce commercials for Klasky. We do a little of everything - 2d, CG, live-action, stop-motion. I'm freelance as well, but it is pretty steady. What are you doing puppets for?
"I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care. Or indeed, why it should be necessary to prove it at all." -Kerr Avon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I work with feathers and fur, doing animal puppets that they use for commercials. I did a rabbit for a fast food chain, refurbished the wings used in constantine, got to work on set with a pair of giant white wings recently. And I do a famous bird puppet that you see quite often in commercials.
I live the sky when it's just after sunset, that deep velvet blue.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
what did you work on at dreamworks?
I live the sky when it's just after sunset, that deep velvet blue.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Road to el Dorado, Spirit, and Sinbad. After Sinbad, I got fed up with working insane hours for low pay, so I left. Best decision I ever made!
"I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care. Or indeed, why it should be necessary to prove it at all." -Kerr Avon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
you know Max Howard from Sprirt? I have friends that worked on Raod, I liked it, and I liked Sinbad. thought the voice choices were off tho. yea the hours were not fun. on fantasia 2000 they were 11 hour days. but in live action that is the way, 10-12 hour days. you have to be freelance there, so you can sleep inbetween jobs!
I live the sky when it's just after sunset, that deep velvet blue.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ndrage85:
there are some things that had to be changed between characters to bring it to the big screen. if Joss hadn't, he would have been alienating the potential audience who aren't familiar with Firefly
I don't buy that - its just a lame excuse.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This is way off topic and I probably shouldn't propagate it further, but you're quite wrong about this.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I don't like the standard explanation because I think it defies physics. I'm fairly certain that two planes flying into the world trade centers would not cause them to collapse. This explanation would need bombs on planes, or bombs in buildings, placed there by al qaeda, for me to buy it.
The impact of the collisions didn't bring the buildings down. They weakened the structure and blew off the fire retardant that helped protect the beams. It was thousands of tons of burning jet fuel that completed the process, softening the steel and causing failure of the floor trusses that tied the columns to the core. That allowed the columns to buckle. After that, it was a classic case of "progressive failure", with the momentum of the falling upper stories collapsing each subsequent lower floor.
No bombs, no conspiracy, no mysteries. Most definitely, no new Physics. Just some twisted and soulless people redefining the concept of evil for the modern world.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I'm not at all sure that OBL had anything to do with 9/11. He claimed credit for it 3 years later.
I'm also sorry about even responding about this but I can't let this false statement go without a response. OBL claimed credit within a few months after 9/11 not 3 years. There is also a tape that had OBL and a couple other terrorist listening to a radio broadcast just after the first plane hit the first tower. The other terrorist were really happy but OBL told them to wait there will be more. Of coarse OBL was the mastermind and/or money behind 9/11.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Could Wash's death have more to do with Alan Tuydk's growing film career and his likely unavailability to return to television in the event of a resurrection?
Dissappointed? An understatement. He was my favorite character. But he is a gifted comic/actor and brings a unique blend of his own comedy to all his work, and may have a future in film.
Perhaps this was merely business. Despite Tuydk's loyalty to and love of the show, he still needs to think about his future.
With Book, I'm not sure this was the case.
Your thoughts?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Could Wash's death have more to do with Alan Tuydk's growing film career and his likely unavailability to return to television in the event of a resurrection?
Dissappointed? An understatement. He was my favorite character. But he is a gifted comic/actor and brings a unique blend of his own comedy to all his work, and may have a future in film.
Perhaps this was merely business. Despite Tuydk's loyalty to and love of the show, he still needs to think about his future.
With Book, I'm not sure this was the case.
Your thoughts?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A lot of people replied with good points, I want to offer/stress two of them.
1) Wash's death heightened the seriousness of the situation for me. I was scared that they were going to kill off Kaylee and the Doc towards the end there, and I wasn't certain that River would live either. All bets were off in my mind.
I said all of that in the first person on-purpose; I don't need to go into the mind of Joss or any such nonsense. I watched the movie and that's the effect it had on me. My guess is that too many people over-analyze movies rather than just watch them.
2) Go re-watch the series and pay attention to Jayne every time Reavers are mentioned. He's terrified of them, along with being highly superstitious by nature. The impression I got is that he's quite comfortable with acting differently when faced with Reavers. Yes, that's inconsistant behavior, but every one of us is built that way.
-Jeff
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Grounded ... thank you soooo much for an extremely long answer to all of Jusl89's points (i'm not being sarcastic). I disagreed sooo much with Jusl89's points, and i felt the need to write that long response you wrote. Thank you for saving me the time. I do, however, have some things to add to your post:
1. Totally agree with you on this one, Grounded. There is nothing artificial about the increase in tension. But if the only reason for Wash's death was to increase tension, i would have been very dissappointed with Joss. There was another reason for Wash's death however - Wash died because sometimes people die for no reason. It amplified the reality of the situation and was probably setting things in motion for the next movie. That doesn't mean i like it. On the contrary, i was crushed when i saw Wash speared. And I'd still like to see Wash come back in the next movie - not anything corny, mind you, but something good. I'm in favor of Wash coming back as a ghost (he never got to say good bye to Zoe and can't leave Serenity). If you've ever seen the way Joss does ghosts, you'll agree it won't be a stupid stunt. Here's the twist though - only River can see him (she's phsycic and can sense feelings and stuff - why couldn't she sense ghosts? Especially because we saw on Miranda that River could sense all of the dead people in her head).
Quote:
Originally posted by Jusl89:
I can't imagine Firefly without Wash. He was a great part of the heart and soul of the series, and without him, there is no Firefly. There was no reason for him to die, and even the way he died was ridiculous. Wash's death prevented me from enjoying the ending of the movie.
I'd suggest watching the movie again, Jusl89. I was vastly shocked, disappointed, sad, and mad with the movie the first time I saw it, but the next time, I wasn't jolted out of it so much when Wash died and enjoyed the great ending of the movie.
If anyone would like more info and discussion on Wash's death, click on this link: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13372
2. Totally agree with you there!!! Months have passed between the end of Firefly and the beginning of the film, and it would be pretty ridiculous to assume everyone went into stasis at the end of Firefly and all relationships are exactly as they were when the series ended.
3.
Quote:Exactly, and stop taking my words!!! The last thing Book said to Mal was to "do whatever River says to." Earlier on, he says that Mal has to believe. What he means by that is that the only way to beat the operative is to truly believe in what he is doing. Book's last words makes him do this. I don't think that the manner of his death was bad though.
Of course Book died for a reason - the crew needed to experience that horror to push them on towards Miranda. Having said that, I think the manner of his death could have been vastly improved. The 'deliver vital message with last breath' thing is a bit tired.
4.
Quote:
Serenity is a sci-fi action movie. Joss would never have been able to sell Objects In Space 2, as cool as that might have been. Action movies need action, and, though I do partially agree with the point about River's fights, I think all the other action sequences were both well paced and well executed, given budget constraints. I don't think I've ever tire of that space battle. Mal knew to freeze up because he knew that the nerve cluster was there. How did he know? Because, as he said, he'd had it removed following some war wound or other.
Again, exactly what I was going to say!!! and i also agree with the point about river's fight at the end, but i was fine with her other fights (i mean, her brain was messed with so she could become a super assasin).
5.
Quote:
Firstly, letting the Operative see how deeply unfounded his belief is is a far crueler punishment than killing him. Secondly, if Mal kills the Operative, who's going to call the troops off?
Yup, exactly.
6
Quote:
Originally written by Grounded:
[
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Crusader wrote:
Could Wash's death have more to do with Alan Tuydk's growing film career and his likely unavailability to return to television in the event of a resurrection?
Dissappointed? An understatement. He was my favorite character. But he is a gifted comic/actor and brings a unique blend of his own comedy to all his work, and may have a future in film.
Perhaps this was merely business. Despite Tuydk's loyalty to and love of the show, he still needs to think about his future.
With Book, I'm not sure this was the case.
Your thoughts?
Okay, I want to clear this up. A lot of people have been saying, "Alan Tuydk is not going to be back for the next two movies. He's going into a career in movies and will not have time to do anything having to do with Firefly." That's not true. Alan Tuydk has been in movies before ("I, Robot", "Dodgeball", "A Knight's Tale" and "28 Days") and he, like the other cast members, is signed on for all three movies.
Book's story will still be told. Joss promised that to Ron Glass when he started the movie.
keep flyin'
EngineAngel
Wash, you were the best gorram pilot in the verse. Rest In Peace (and then come back again!!!)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't know too many movies made from tv series where the characters are identical to their tv characters. I kinda wondered why in star trek tng movies, their uniforms aren't always the same as those in the series.
I too am heartbroken that Wash is dead but i saw the movie first before the episodes so i just look at it as though wash is still alive and never will die, movie or no movie.
*sigh*.... still trying to get over the reality that firefly is over.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree with you Jynk about "quiet reflection", I loved the movie and wouldn't/couldn't say anything against Joss.
I went back and watched the last three episodes and realized you were right about Book and Jayne, they got pretty close. So Jayne was certainly motivated by Book's death.
I've ordered the novel version and am awaiting it with bated breath! Can't wait to read it.
FollowMal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Random thoughts:
Gawd I miss Firefly.
My friend summed it up perfectly. "Serenity was a pretty good movie, but a sorry follow up the best science fiction series ever."
HK has covered my point of view perfectly, as he usually does.
I had hopes that Serenity might be able to re-spark the Firefly magic, but instead it's just reinforced my perception of how much we've lost.
Gawd I miss Firefly.
I should have seen it coming. I saw it coming. But hope took over. I'd like to say I'm not surprised, but I really thought Joss could pull it off. Perhaps everything is destined to be swallowed up by mainstream mediocrity, but it sure hurts to see it happen sometimes.
Gawd I miss Firefly.
EVERYONE HERE WHO DIDN'T LIVE THROUGH THE CANCELLATION NEEDS TO READ THE FOLLOWING:
http://www.keithmpire.com/nonfiction/firefly/
I remember weeping the first time I read this, swearing to myself the pronouncement was premature. But Firefly wasn't the action-packed mediocrity that mainstream America craves. Its destiny was pre-ordained.
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Frankly, your opinion sucks, Serenity DID happen, and it did NOT suck.
How do you like them apples?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
I should have seen it coming. I saw it coming. But hope took over. I'd like to say I'm not surprised, but I really thought Joss could pull it off. Perhaps everything is destined to be swallowed up by mainstream mediocrity, but it sure hurts to see it happen sometimes.
Here's the thing to everyone expressing views like this: this is your opinion. In my book, Serenity was an immensely awesome movie; my favorite, in fact, of all time (biased slightly, of course, by its affiliation to my favorite show). I went in to the theaters with high expectations; I left satisfied, though shocked by the two deaths. I had a much lower opinion of the movie at that point than I do now; I urge you all to see it again, if you haven't. The second time, I enjoyed it much more.
I loved this movie. So if you wanna say you didn't like it, that's fine; to say that it sucked, though, or even was mediocre, that's okay too, I guess - just remember that there's many millions of people who disagree with you.
-Steve
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
I loved this movie. So if you wanna say you didn't like it, that's fine; to say that it sucked, though, or even was mediocre, that's okay too, I guess - just remember that there's many millions of people who disagree with you.
-Steve
Fair enough. I can't say it 'sucked'. In fact it was better than most big-budget Hollywood action movies. But here's the deal -
Firefly was a very unique and special experience. It called out to those of us fed up with the usual mediocrity. Speaking personally, it helped reassure me that there are others out there who appreciate real art. Firefly told stories that respected the intelligence and maturity of its audience. It challenged convention and showed that there could be something to a science fiction series besides monster aliens and starship battles.
It hurts to see it swallowed up and regurgitated into just another action movie.
My hope is that Joss can look back at the series and realize that the very reasons it 'failed' financially were the ones that made it such a spectacular success artistically. My guess is, he already knows this. Perhaps he hoped he could make a big hollywood action movie that would be successful enough to save the franchise. Maybe the plan was to get buy-in and then revert to some decent storytelling. I'm certainly hoping that still happens.
But the problem is, you can't have it both ways. There's still enough of Firefly in Serenity to make it unpallateable to the Ahnold fans, but not enough moving art to save it for those who found the series such a unique jewel.
Most of the people I've befriended amongst the Browncoats watch very little TV. For us, its generally a waste of time. It doesn't entertain us and it doesn't represent us. Firefly did both. I can't help but feel that Serenity has left us behind in its attempt to reach the mainstream movie crowd. That sucks because those folks have their entertainment already.
In the past, Joss has taken care of the rest of us. I hope he'll get back to doing that soon.
EDIT: to add, I've seen the movie three times now, and while I did find a few more things to like about it, it still just doesn't hold my attention the way the series did.
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
I went in to the theaters with high expectations; I left satisfied, though shocked by the two deaths. I had a much lower opinion of the movie at that point than I do now; I urge you all to see it again, if you haven't. The second time, I enjoyed it much more.
-Steve
Saw it twice Steve, did not get any better for me the second time around.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thought I’d address one of HK’s points. I never got around to responding to his nig post in one of the other threads, but he’s making some of the same arguments here so I’ll try and address them.
Quote:First off, you seem to be stating opinion as fact, which tends to get folks with differing opinions riled up. Might want to look to that; these discussions can get pretty ugly when tempers flare.
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
The huge problem with the "increase in tention" caused by Wash's death is that even the people who defend Joss's decision were taken out of the story by that event! Everyone is suddenly thrust into a meta-narrative of WWJD (what would Joss do?). We're not thinking about how our BDH's are going to deal with a specific problem in the story, we're thinking about how they're gonna deal with Joss Almighty. Aesthetically, killing Wash is nothing but a power trip, and only those of us who are obsessed with Joss's power (the hardcore fans) care. If he told a better story we'd all be thinking about what's happening to the characters in character terms, not hardcore fan terms. It's a huge error in judgement and a betrayal of the powerful sense of reality the show so effortlessly gave us week after week.
Now, the meta-narrative. I’m sorry you were taken out of the story by Wash’s death. I was not thrust into a “WWJD” mindset when I saw that, so you do not speak for me. I was not thinking “Will Joss actually kill them off?” after Wash’s death, I was thinking “Jesus! This is serious! They might not make it.” Joss was nowhere in my thought processes at that moment, just fear, adrenaline and a deep identification with the characters. In retrospect I am able to recognize the device that caused me to feel those emotions, but at the time I was not thinking “Wow, Whedon’s decision to kill of Wash has really heightened the tension in the final section of the movie.” If you were, I am sorry for you. But the goal of any film technique is to be invisible, to keep the audience from pausing to analyze it. Just because someone brings it up after the fact does not mean that they were pulled into some kind of meta-narrative state by the technique, it just means that they can recognize after the fact that such a technique was used and thus understand their response better.
I would also argue that such a technique actually brings us closer to the characters rather than jarring them out of a story. In television, you now that the cast is going to be back next week--it creates a sense of distance between you and the characters. Captain Picard may feel his life is in danger, but we all know he’ll be back on the Enterprise next week, so our emotions do not match those of the characters. Something similar happens in formula action movies; all the heroes usually survive while maybe a few sympathetic second tier characters get it. With Serenity, the Browncoats go in with the emotional distance of the TV show and the regular audiences go in with the emotional distance of formula action. Joss has always felt that distance between the characters and the audience is bad; when he puts people in danger, he wants you to feel they’re in danger (the characters certainly don’t know they’ll be back next week or in the next film), he wants you to feel what they’re going through. That is realism, emotional realism. And after Wash got it, I was right there with the characters: terrified, excited, saddened, totally unsure of what would happen next. For me, just like for them, the outcome was totally up in the air. I wasn’t worrying about Joss, Joss didn’t even exist for me any more. I was worried about Mal, and Jayne, and Zoe, and Simon, and Inara, and Kaylee, and River--just like they were. So, don’t tell me that Wash’s death distanced me from these characters, that it took me out of the story--because it sucked me in more. It removed the last bit of emotional distance between me and them and for that short while I was right there with them. Didn’t work
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
Random thoughts:
Gawd I miss Firefly.
My friend summed it up perfectly. "Serenity was a pretty good movie, but a sorry follow up the best science fiction series ever."
HK has covered my point of view perfectly, as he usually does.
I had hopes that Serenity might be able to re-spark the Firefly magic, but instead it's just reinforced my perception of how much we've lost.
Gawd I miss Firefly.
I should have seen it coming. I saw it coming. But hope took over. I'd like to say I'm not surprised, but I really thought Joss could pull it off. Perhaps everything is destined to be swallowed up by mainstream mediocrity, but it sure hurts to see it happen sometimes.
Gawd I miss Firefly.
EVERYONE HERE WHO DIDN'T LIVE THROUGH THE CANCELLATION NEEDS TO READ THE FOLLOWING:
http://www.keithmpire.com/nonfiction/firefly/
I remember weeping the first time I read this, swearing to myself the pronouncement was premature. But Firefly wasn't the action-packed mediocrity that mainstream America craves. Its destiny was pre-ordained.
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
I lived through the cancellation, I got a Tivo box specifically to record Firefly on Friday nights, I loved the show, I kept eps on my Tivo until the dvd came out, and I've arrived at a completely different conclusion.
I'm fairly certain no movie that had any reasonable chance of being made would have kept you happy. The medium is different, you can't tell the stories in a movie the same as with a tv series. A movie (particularly the first of hopefully many sequels) has to be self contained and explain itself. A tv show can let big question marks hang in an episode, knowing that they'll be back the following week (or year) to explain them. A tv show has the time to explore in depth each character in a 9 person cast.
That might mean the world of Firefly is dead to you unless it comes in the episodic format of tv. My enjoyment of the show and the movie is broader than that, I can recognize the differences and the similarities and glory in both.
If you think Serenity is just another action movie look again. It twists many of the conventions of an action movie just like Firefly twisted the conventions of tv. It has all the same emotional elements, love, humor, surprise, terror, anguish, action and others. The balance is different, but the quality isn't.
If Firefly is dead, long may its child live.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by engineangel:
1. Totally agree with you on this one, Grounded. There is nothing artificial about the increase in tension. But if the only reason for Wash's death was to increase tension, i would have been very dissappointed with Joss. There was another reason for Wash's death however - Wash died because sometimes people die for no reason. It amplified the reality of the situation and was probably setting things in motion for the next movie. That doesn't mean i like it. On the contrary, i was crushed when i saw Wash speared. And I'd still like to see Wash come back in the next movie - not anything corny, mind you, but something good.
I'd suggest watching the movie again, Jusl89. I was vastly shocked, disappointed, sad, and mad with the movie the first time I saw it, but the next time, I wasn't jolted out of it so much when Wash died and enjoyed the great ending of the movie.
If anyone would like more info and discussion on Wash's death, click on this link: http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=13372
Engine - thanks so much for your thoughts, and for the link to a really good Wash thread. I have been avoiding the 'hated it' threads since the first couple days when I got into a couple of poisonous threads and I just wasn't interested in any negative opinions at that point.
I just went to read the Wash thread, and realized you were all there, in a good way: Tinman, Biglion, Scarecrow, Dorothy, funnycoloredhorse, all you people whose opinions I really look forward to reading. Anyway. Thanks for the link, bigfloatingballonangel.
Also! Thanks for the line Book burbles at the (his) end "Do whatever River says" dang, I have been trying hard to hear that one. Thanks.
I also suggest as strongly as possible without actually
shouting
that anyone who didn't like it the first time go see it again, and bring people who aren't already fans. My appreciation has been greatly enhanced by viewings with non-coats (actually that should be newcoats, because they are all Brownies now!) Seeing the fire of passion ignite in a newbie's eyes is a uniquely wonderful thing.
Along that same line of thought (bringing newbies) It's easy for us to lose perspective on all of this when we love FF so much and most of us waited a long time for the BDresurrection. That gives a fan plenty of time to make stuff up in her/is own head about what they'd like to see happen. Serious danger zone, that.
Just when this thread was getting a little intense
Idrawart and Spike&jezebel hijak it for some animated comic relief.
Then Spike&Jez, Dream t, DonC, Tortimer and, have I missed anyone?
hijack it somemore for a little OBL/CIA/911 rant (and no one mentioned Carl Rove?), which isn't really a hijack, since there are some pretty strong parallels, echos and reflections between the two empires. By the way, I -totally- agree with DonC's "progressive failure" asessment of the towers' tumbles. That was one bloody hot 500 mph fireball.
Idrawart (on Mal trusting Jayne)- did you notice the line Jayne had in the millionth argument about the Tam's continued presence (in the crew lounge) where Jayne quietly says "No reward, huh?" Cracks me up every time.
SergeantX, thanks for the link to the original fan's lament and musings on cancellation. Beaut. He writes:
"It's a whole lot easier to keep your eyes steady on the horizon when you know there's somebody else seeing that same horizon with you."
Yes, indeed and so say all of us. Hopefully, the author's here somewhere, with horizons vasty and sunsets glorious.
Beauty beauty, great thread, guys!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I loved the movie with all of my heart!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, for the nth. time - all 9 actors are signed for all three movies. Having said this:
Scene - outside of the Red Carpet Premiere Party at 'Versal Studios Hollywood.
Me: (whispering in ear) "I cried. Twice."
Alan Tudyk : (holding my hand from the greeting still) )"I'm so sorry!"
Me: "I felt staked through the chest."
AT: "Don't worry, everything will be fine. I promise you."
Later - Same place.
Me: "I kinda hate you for killing Wash."
Joss Whedon: "Well, you know... sorry."
Me: "But I do have some theories as to how you can bring him back."
JW: "Oh, you're not alone! I have like a million of them. I promise you, he'll be back. Everything's OK."
Trust Joss - he knows what he's doing. Yes, he's killed Wash. Yes, flashbacks would be the cheapest and easiest way to bring him back. I don't think that will be the case.
Wash and Book will be back.
In Joss I Trust.
"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence? Or is this the wrong crowd for that?" (Wash)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My oppinion can be simply stated. Serenity as a continuation of the firefly universe SUCKED
all the points memtioned with the first post are totaly correct.
that being said as a stand alone movie serenity was the best movie ive seen in years
Try to understand the possition joss was put in , he had to make a moive that sold to people who had never seen firefly and i think he did a good job at that, whenever a writer gets put into this possition someone has to loose. better it to be the fans and sell the movie then have a total flop and a few happy people AND be 40 mill in the hole.
its a simple numbers game. just like the browncoats WE LOOSE superior numbers (thanks for the re-enactment joss)
and as for wash/book there are 9 characters in this universe. 3 die in the moive and only one is resurected (re built) at the end. the other two will be back somehow or in some way i dont believe joss could warp this universe that much and sleep at night
thats assuming there is another....
and on that note GO SEE SERENITY AGAIN RIGHT NOW
we havnt even broken even yet !
thanks Joss!
"When you cant run to see serenity you crawl to see serenity, and when you cant do that... well you know the rest"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracy:
Okay, for the nth. time - all 9 actors are signed for all three movies. Having said this:
Trust Joss - he knows what he's doing. Yes, he's killed Wash. Yes, flashbacks would be the cheapest and easiest way to bring him back. I don't think that will be the case.
Wash and Book will be back.
Thanks for this post Tracy, I hope it's true!!
P.S. How were you lucky enough to get into the 'versil premiere?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Paid for the party the Browncoats had organized at Hard Rock, which was subsequently cancelled cos they didn't get the minimum number of people requested. 'Versal found out about it, said, "You know what? You guys come to our party!"
We were very well-behaved, followed the rules... unlike some other people that exploited their every 'Versal connection, called in every favor, and then treated it like a Gorram convention! Don't get me started...
*goes back to thinking about Alan almost dragging her to the bathroom - he has a hard time letting go of my hand, as it's happened before*
"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence? Or is this the wrong crowd for that?" (Wash)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
5. I don't know why Joss doesn't kill villains, maybe he wants to reuse them or prove that heros are different. If someone has theories, post them.
Joss has said he doesnt think that a hero kills people. He talks like this when he discusses the state of comics. He has said he would get rid of character like Punisher and the Dark Horse Batman. He believes that a hero, being a virtuos character, cant kill someone
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Stake, I really kinda hate these discussions. I'm not trying to convince anyone about the movie. I'm sharing my experiences with the hope that they resonate with others here. You and others coming here to tell me that I'm "wrong" and "defend" the movie is really just an annoyance. I very purposefully refrain from posting my negative feelings about the movie in threads specifically praising the BDM. I would just be a jerk if I did that, wouldn't I? Folks like you coming to this thread to "refute" my gorram feelings and perceptions is getting pretty old. I'm having a hard time finding it anything but rude. You loved the movie. I'm sincerely happy you did. I wish to hell I did. I could not. For the reasons I've been articulating. The failure of Serenity is still pretty painful to me personally and I need to talk to people who understand what it means.
Quote:Stake, bubbala, we all do this. You did the exact same thing in this very post:
Originally posted by StakeTheLurk:
First off, you seem to be stating opinion as fact, which tends to get folks with differing opinions riled up. Might want to look to that; these discussions can get pretty ugly when tempers flare.
Quote:See how easy it is? That's your experience, not a fact. Personally, I don't have a problem with it; its called speaking with authority; we all have the right to act as if what we think is true actually is true.
I would also argue that such a technique actually brings us closer to the characters rather than jarring them out of a story. In television, you know that the cast is going to be back next week--it creates a sense of distance between you and the characters. [Not me.] Captain Picard may feel his life is in danger, but we all know he’ll be back on the Enterprise next week, so our emotions do not match those of the characters. [Nope.] Something similar happens in formula action movies; all the heroes usually survive while maybe a few sympathetic second tier characters get it. With Serenity, the Browncoats go in with the emotional distance of the TV show [I didn't.] and the regular audiences go in with the emotional distance of formula action.
Obviously, I don't experience t.v. or movies the way you do. I've watched every episode of Firefly umpteen times and I have exactly the same emotional engagement today as I did three years ago when they were first aired. When Kaylee gets shot, I can't help feeling frightened, not because I don't know that Kaylee's gonna pull through in the second half of the episode, but because good art never gets too far from its reference point: real life. People die of gunshot wounds every day. If you're gut-shot, you don't have long to live without treatment. Firefly, for me, creates the illusion that Kaylee is/was/will be a real person. That real person's life is in grave danger when Dobson shoots her. For me, the best art has the conviction of a documentary. For me, Serenity the movie didn't have it--and didn't have it in spades!
As for the meta-narrative, I was reacting to the many, many posts I've read on this site where people said that yes, indeed they did immediately think of Joss and what he was capable of when Wash died. And they loved it. What I said was "even the people who defend Joss's decision were taken out of the story by that event!" I was refering to the vast majority of posts I'd read. So, when you come along and say, "Well it didn't do that to me!" I'm not even talking about you.
Quote:And that's exactly why this sort of "Act of God" event can be such a tough sell; its very nature makes it hard to render invisible. Some people will be manipulated exactly as the artist intends and some will not. As far as I saw, Firefly kept the deus ex machina theatrics to a minimum, surrounded them with mountains of finely observed realism (I'm thinking of Mal's
But the goal of any film technique is to be invisible, to keep the audience from pausing to analyze it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
i agree with much of your post, however:
[Mal didn't kill the Operative? So the Operative kills all of Mals friends, kills Book, and leads to the death of Wash, and yet he walks away? If there ever was a use for a death, this would be it.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i think NOT killing the operative worked on 2 levels.
a) Most of the murder mal does is when he is pushed to it. At the point he actually finished with the operative, he was no longer pushed. He had the upper hand and was accomplishing his goal. If further violence had ensued, he probably would have killed with no worries.
b) more importantly, the guy had a whole quadrant's worth (or what was left after the battle) of soldiers there... killing their leader would have probably pissed them off extremely... Mal chose reason over violence - an ironic twist maybe for his character, but hey in joss' universe, everyone grows...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Stake, I really kinda hate these discussions. I'm not trying to convince anyone about the movie. I'm sharing my experiences with the hope that they resonate with others here. You and others coming here to tell me that I'm "wrong" and "defend" the movie is really just an annoyance. I very purposefully refrain from posting my negative feelings about the movie in threads specifically praising the BDM. I would just be a jerk if I did that, wouldn't I? Folks like you coming to this thread to "refute" my gorram feelings and perceptions is getting pretty old.
No one's trying to 'refute' your feelings. I suspect, like me, most people are just finding it difficult to understand how someone could have such a profoundly negative reaction to the movie. Consequently, it's only natural that they'd want to discuss what it is that caused this reaction and try to explain how they saw things differently. This is a discussion. It's what message boards are for.
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Book dying the very moment before Simon reaches him,.....,River's climactic and utterly fantastical triumph over the reavers).
I definitely agree about these moments being unreal, if not the others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by frunk:
I'm fairly certain no movie that had any reasonable chance of being made would have kept you happy. The medium is different, you can't tell the stories in a movie the same as with a tv series. A movie (particularly the first of hopefully many sequels) has to be self contained and explain itself. A tv show can let big question marks hang in an episode, knowing that they'll be back the following week (or year) to explain them. A tv show has the time to explore in depth each character in a 9 person cast.
I appreciate this argument, but it just doesn't ring true. My disappointments had nothing to do with the self-contained nature of the story. There are plenty of ways to tell a story without resorting to action-movie cliches. That was the primary compromise that ruined Serenity for me.
Quote:
If you think Serenity is just another action movie look again. It twists many of the conventions of an action movie just like Firefly twisted the conventions of tv. It has all the same emotional elements, love, humor, surprise, terror, anguish, action and others. The balance is different, but the quality isn't.
If Firefly is dead, long may its child live.
As you point out, it was mostly a question of balance. Joss tried to balance between the subtle family drama of Firefly and the no-holds-barred rollercoaster ride of an action movie. It was a decent enough attempt, but it failed to grab me. I'd rather Joss tug at my emotions than keep me on the edge of my seat. Just a matter of preference.
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SergeantX:
I appreciate this argument, but it just doesn't ring true. My disappointments had nothing to do with the self-contained nature of the story. There are plenty of ways to tell a story without resorting to action-movie cliches. That was the primary compromise that ruined Serenity for me.
I think Joss made it quite clear from early on that Serenity was going to be bigger, faster and louder than the series. That was his goal from the start. I don't think that warrants the disappointment you express. There's still more storytelling and character development in this than any single episode of Firefly, it just happens to be interspersed with more action. I'm sure if you get the dvd you can fast forward through the action sequences and you'll have a decent enough (not the best, not the worst) episode of Firefly. Still way better than most things on tv or in the movies.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Okay, I want to clear this up. A lot of people have been saying, "Alan Tuydk is not going to be back for the next two movies. He's going into a career in movies and will not have time to do anything having to do with Firefly." That's not true. Alan Tuydk has been in movies before ("I, Robot", "Dodgeball", "A Knight's Tale" and "28 Days") and he, like the other cast members, is signed on for all three movies.
Book's story will still be told. Joss promised that to Ron Glass when he started the movie.
keep flyin'
EngineAngel
Wash, you were the best gorram pilot in the verse. Rest In Peace (and then come back again!!!)
This is, of course, assuming the two sequels are conceived, produced and released. Considering the abyssmal box office numbers, I'm not confident. There is, however, a greater hope in a return to the small screen. I would prefer this, in fact. I'll take 22 episodes a year over two 120 minute movies any day. It means more Firefly!!! Of course, the DVD release and overseas figures could change this.
Theoretically, Wheedon and Tuydk might have seen the writing on the wall and gave Alan an out should the show revert to a televised version. Professional courtesy. Yes, Tuydk has done a number of feature films (and was wonderful in all of them) but most were produced after Firefly's cancellation. Alan T's budding career was not so much a reality then as it is now.
It is also possible that Wash's death was written into the series arc, and had the show continued, we would have experienced his death on the small screen. We all know that Wheedon had a much grander plan in mind when the show was killed by Fox.
Disclaimer: I hold absolutley NOTHING against Wheedon (or Alan T) for Wash's death. Creative or Business choice, he had a reason. And you can't dispute the effectiveness of the loss of a character like Wash. If this is part of the vision, so be it. There are still 7 other wonderful characters to love.
Also: the fact that Tuydk is signed on for two more films ONLY insures Tuydk's obligation to perform should the producers will it. Wheedon likely has every legal right to include or preclude any character's return. Also, it is a good way to lock in a financial deal, should any of the actors hit the big time and wish to demand more money (not that they would, it's just a precaution)
I guess I'm a pessimist. It would be wonderful to have Wash return. How emotionally fullfilling would that be? I'll keep my fingers crossed!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Crusader:
Also: the fact that Tuydk is signed on for two more films ONLY insures Tuydk's obligation to perform should the producers will it. Wheedon likely has every legal right to include or preclude any character's return. Also, it is a good way to lock in a financial deal, should any of the actors hit the big time and wish to demand more money (not that they would, it's just a precaution)
To take that one stage further, they may not have signed on before the script was locked down, and indeed it could have been the case that the studio could have decreed that, following test screenings, Joss would have to keep Wash alive, despite how he wanted the story to go. Cue hastily written and filmed scene of Wash's leg getting pinned, and him somehow being able to play dead so the Reavers don't get him while eveyone else goes off.
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I will agree to disagree and I disagree some much I don't know where to start so I am just leaving it at that.
~~River: Bible's broken. Contradictions, false logics. Doesn't make sense.~~
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, actually, that's not what he says, and (to me) isn't a very close paraphrase.
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Also! Thanks for the line Book burbles at the (his) end "Do whatever River says" dang, I have been trying hard to hear that one. Thanks.
The lines actually go as follows:
Book: "...River..."
(Book grabs Mal's face)
Book: "I don't care what you believe. Just believe it. Whatever you..."
He never completes the line. As written in the shooting script, it's "Whatever you have to." Apparently Joss liked the ambiguity of the uncompleted line. I'd guess that it was shot as written too, but this is the reading Joss chose in the final edit.
I'm not sure how anybody can get "Do whatever River says" out of that. While River is certainly on his mind, to me Book is simply repeating his earlier call for Mal to find something to believe in.
It's all very existential, especially when you consider that the Operative is condemned for being a true believer, while Mal is being urged to find faith.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
JUSL89,
Your comments are certainly not the first of this type here, but that doesn't make them any less unfounded. Actually, let me be more specific. Most of your problems with the movie are your own business. However, the repeated moaning about Book and Wash's death are preposterous. Yes, they are characters we loved, but they are just that - characters. As important as Browncoats are, we have absolutely no stake in the actual storytelling. You are going to tell Joss what he should do with the Firefly gang? The man that created them in the first place? It's so ridiculous. Secondly, some people on here assume they have vital information that they clearly don't have (in terms of contracts and signing on for sequels). Just because you read somewhere that all nine signed on for three sequels don't necessarily make it so. They didn't. Joss wouldn't state that as a reason for script choices because it would hang the actor out to dry with the fans (not that it should - this show may be some fans' lives, but at the end of the day, it's a job for the actors). So quit it with the Joss-bashing and the scripting-by-committee. I wouldn't even want to watch the series if the nine crew were guaranteed to live each week. Sounds like Friends-in-Space to me. And if the series had continued, do you honestly think only 2 members would be dead by now, given Joss style and track record?
So just relax and see Serenity for what it is - a nice bonus.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Without a doubt Firefly was a fantastic series. And certainly a large number of fans were disappointed with Serenity.
I'll mention an example of how this impacted my family. I convinced our daughter (age 18) to watch a couple episodes, she was immediately hooked and loved Firefly. We saw Serenity, she was horrified at the deaths of Book and Wash. Yesterday I suggested we go see Serenity again (I've already seen it three times myself) and my daughter's reply: "No, I couldn't I can't stand to see Wash die again."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MalPal:
So just relax and see Serenity for what it is - a nice bonus.
Very well said I have to agree
~~River: Bible's broken. Contradictions, false logics. Doesn't make sense.~~
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Mithel:
Yesterday I suggested we go see Serenity again (I've already seen it three times myself) and my daughter's reply: "No, I couldn't I can't stand to see Wash die again."
Unfortunately, Wash's death seems to have affected a lot of people this way (me and mine as well). Others, not so much.
Oh well, I guess that is why it is good to be in America where we are all entitled to our own opinions.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
written by Tracy:
Okay, for the nth. time - all 9 actors are signed for all three movies. Having said this:
Scene - outside of the Red Carpet Premiere Party at 'Versal Studios Hollywood.
Me: (whispering in ear) "I cried. Twice."
Alan Tudyk : (holding my hand from the greeting still) )"I'm so sorry!"
Me: "I felt staked through the chest."
AT: "Don't worry, everything will be fine. I promise you."
Later - Same place.
Me: "I kinda hate you for killing Wash."
Joss Whedon: "Well, you know... sorry."
Me: "But I do have some theories as to how you can bring him back."
JW: "Oh, you're not alone! I have like a million of them. I promise you, he'll be back. Everything's OK."
Trust Joss - he knows what he's doing. Yes, he's killed Wash. Yes, flashbacks would be the cheapest and easiest way to bring him back. I don't think that will be the case.
Wash and Book will be back.
In Joss I Trust.
Seriously, Tracy? Joss really said that? If you say yes, i will love you for life.
Please be true!!!keep flyin'
EngineAngel
Wash, you were the best gorram pilot in the verse. Rest In Peace (and then come back again!!!)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yes, he did say that to me - I was already fine after Alan had told me so, but Joss reassured me.
In Joss I Trust...
"Can I make a suggestion that doesn't involve violence? Or is this the wrong crowd for that?" (Wash)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
wooo hooo!!!! And as promised, .
keep flyin'
EngineAngel
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracy:
Yes, he did say that to me - I was already fine after Alan had told me so, but Joss reassured me.
In Joss I Trust...
I am not only going to kiss you
but I just may go see the gorram movie again.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think you're missing a significant aspect of Jayne's character development. In the series, Jayne developed a friendship of sorts with Book. They lifted weights together, and often talked about spiritual matters (such as during The Message). In the BDM, when Jayne makes the so-called "out of character" decision to help Mal "misbehave," he cites Book's advice, that it's better to do something right if you can't do something good. Yes, this is unlike Jayne from the series. But it's a stroke of genius on the writer's part that we actually get some payoff from Jayne's tv relationship with Book. How cool is it that the payoff comes in the form of a moral decision--maybe the first important moral decision Jayne has ever made?!! Fantastic.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:Quote:Well, actually, that's not what he says, and (to me) isn't a very close paraphrase.
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Also! Thanks for the line Book burbles at the (his) end "Do whatever River says" dang, I have been trying hard to hear that one. Thanks.
The lines actually go as follows:
Book: "...River..."
(Book grabs Mal's face)
Book: "I don't care what you believe. Just believe it. Whatever you..."
He never completes the line. As written in the shooting script, it's "Whatever you have to." Apparently Joss liked the ambiguity of the uncompleted line. I'd guess that it was shot as written too, but this is the reading Joss chose in the final edit.
I'm not sure how anybody can get "Do whatever River says" out of that. While River is certainly on his mind, to me Book is simply repeating his earlier call for Mal to find something to believe in.
It's all very existential, especially when you consider that the Operative is condemned for being a true believer, while Mal is being urged to find faith.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
Ooooh I have the Visual Companion now, and isn't it pretty!
I'm wondering if anyone else is having trouble finding it in stock? Is it selling really well? Hope so. I'm sorry if that means anyone here has to wait, but I'd love to see it sell right out. I poured through it a bit this evening, and read the script to the point where Mal tells the crew to saddle up or get off at Haven. I wanted to at least get a sense of how much the film tends to waver from the script, since I've never read a Joss script before, and to read the whole Book dies scene. I've read several posts quoting differences between script lines and spoken lines in the movie (and other things, ie: keens/keels), so I wanted to have it in front of me before responding. The wavering is interesting, hopefully there will be discussions on that later. Of course I have an excuse now to go see it again this week (having already brought in all the friends I can muster without actual preaching). I would have added the idea 'do what River says' to my attempts at lip reading Book's line. But it makes more sense to me too that he says something more along the lines of - choose and act for everyone's sake, as the script says "Whatever you have to". The whatever could sound like River with a mouth half full of fake blood (yuck). He does say River's name, but reading this, I think it's only farther back as the script indicates.
Um, existentialist, I think - only to a point. I don't think Book would tell just anyone 'I don't care what you believe, just believe it.' I think that message was specifically for Mal, because I think Book understands (like Inara and Zoe) that despite the PIA ways Mal has been acting since they met, in Mal's deepest heart, he is a great man. I don't think Book would be telling Jayne 'I don't care what you believe, just believe it', because, while I believe Book sees Jayne has potential (last few episodes of the show), Jayne still struggles with even understanding why a person would choose to put someone else first. At least till he slides the bottle to Simon. I don't think Book would have said that to many people. Anyway, just my thoughts, no one else's.
Veering wildly OT now (but still Book/Mal related) there's some other stuff in the VC version of the firelit scene on Haven, that looks to me suspiciously like Joss is hinting that Book and Mal have some abilities too. Page 99, and the first bit of 100. Book has some lines that sound an awful lot like someone who knows he's about to die. Then there's the bit I've been wondering about since the first time I saw the movie. The firelit scene suddenly cuts to River lying cuffed to the grate, with Mal crouched behind her. I've been thinking everytime 'is she seeing/hearing them, or is Mal connected to and seeing her?' Maybe I'm fishing, but I've always thought that scene placement was odd. If Joss was
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I got something different out of that dream sequence, though not on first viewing. I think it harkens back to River's comment in the cargo hold: "He didn't lie down. They never lie down." Yet in the dream, she's being told to lie down by an authority figure (representing the Alliance) and is resisting.
Originally posted by liminalosity:
The firelit scene suddenly cuts to River lying cuffed to the grate, with Mal crouched behind her. I've been thinking everytime 'is she seeing/hearing them, or is Mal connected to and seeing her?' Maybe I'm fishing, but I've always thought that scene placement was odd. If Joss was trying to indicate that River hears them, then why'd he put Mal in the scene behind her. Was it just to bump the line "I coulda left her there?" Fits right in with the bit where River yanks herself out of the nightmare where the class lies down, and she's cuffed to the grid, then we cut to Mal waking startled as Wash yells that
Think I'm seeing ponies and plastic rockets?...goad, goad.
I see it as a playing-out of her schizophrenia. River knows about Miranda, but she's desperately trying to suppress that knowledge -- but her "neural stripping" makes that almost impossible. (She can't not feel.) So whenever she's placed in a situation that forces that knowledge to the surface, she deflects it, never stating the underlying truth -- the Reavers don't lie down (unlike the rest of the Mirandans). Little River won't lie down (though the Alliance is trying to force her to). It's going to get much much worse (when we all find out that awful knowledge).
One thing that's quite clear after repeated viewings: even River's craziest remarks aren't crazy at all. The brilliant part is: that's true even of the things she says in the Firefly episodes. Everything makes perfect sense once you have the key.
The only conclusion I can draw is that the events in Serenity were all clear in Joss' mind from the beginning. The story would have played out more slowly if the series had continued, but it would have come to the same place.
Anyway, back to your thoughts -- I didn't see it quite as you did, but it's entirely possible for Joss to write scenes that work on multiple levels at once. The "tore up plenty" exchange is a prominent example.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
some people liked the phantom menace. some people hated serenity. you get weirdos in every fandom. its a sad fact of life.
think about it here - serenity was a first up, nothing mainstream behind it to pull people in. hardly anybody had seen firefly. so some concessions needed to be made. hell, they even gave us some bits just for us (the three switches, i finally saw the thing on the third and fourth viewings). joss couldn't make a movie that only we'd go see. inferior numbers... terrible thing that.
there hasn't been anything like serenity in ages. it had no big stars, no big franchise like the other genre films (may i once again snipe at the first two star wars prequels, i do that alot). why should it be like firefly anyway?
Extra note - the river fight scenes, come on ppl, dont you see? summer glau in a dress, beating ppl up, it pulls in the teenage boy audience! i know - i went to see it with three of them.
peace out
Kizzie
XxX
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Y'know, for me, in the FF pilot, when they got away from the alliance so easily with the crybaby and a moonin', well then, what's all this problem with the 'fantastical' or 'unreal', anyway?
Originally posted by Grounded:Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Book dying the very moment before Simon reaches him,.....,River's climactic and utterly fantastical triumph over the reavers).
I definitely agree about these moments being unreal, if not the others.
"We live on a spaceship, dear."
It's ALL good!
Chrisisall BDM fanforever
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well I don't have faith in Joss regarding bringing Book & Wash back. I just can't see how this can work. Options I see:
1) Prequel - sigh... ok... better than nothing. This could be placed before the series, this would be a disaster (we wouldn't have Simon, River or Book!). This could be in the eight months between the series and the movie. Ok... but still bad cause we already know Book and Wash die and we're still mourning their loss. The one big advantage this has is that it solves the problem of having uber River psychic and martial arts master always ready to save any situation. The big flaw is that it's like reading the ending of a book and *then* reading the book all out of order. Bad... very bad. We loved Firefly, all we wanted was more Firefly (not the BDM as Serenity was made).
2) Resurrection - oh my gawd no Joss, this is NOT Buffy!
3) Flashbacks - argh... please no, this is still a really bad choice.
4) Ignore Serenity and pretend it never happened and just continue on with Firefly (an idea I had but nicely suggested in the next post, thanks Dan).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I like option 4.
Ignore Serenity completely and continue on from the last Firefly episode. Just forget that Serenity was ever out on the Big Screen. It never happened. That's the only way the show can go on.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Thanks Dan, I'd forgotten about that option (I've edited my post). Yes, seriously I'm tempted to say the best option is to pretend the movie never happened and just continue with Firefly from the end of the series.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sorry, JUSL89. I can't really agree with any of your comments about Serenity. I loved it.
1 & 3 The deaths of Wash and Book: OK, upseting, but a part of good storytelling. As soon as i heard there was going to be a movie follow-up to Firefly, i knew that at least one character would die. Joss has always been very willing to kill characters for the sake of the story, unlike most other TV writers. As a writer myself I can understand the need to have characters die sometimes. i enjoy Joss' work more for this, not less. He has faith in his audiences ability to accept change. His shows don't become stale because things constantly change. And there is always a real sense of peril, because no character is safe. Most TV bores me because there is no sense of peril: all characters are sure to survive every perilous situation they encounter.
2: The interaction between Mal and Simon struck me as odd at first. But on second viewing i could see that this was simply showing the tremendous amount of stress they were both under. It also provided Mal with a character arc for the film. He starts out broken, bitter and hollow (traits we saw signs of in Firefly, accentuated here) and is healed by finding something to believe in and fight for. He regains some of what he lost in Serenity Valley. This is another Whedon trademark: characters change. Their relationships change and sometimes fall apart. I think that if FF had continued, Mal and simon would have eventually come into conflict in this way anyway.
4: I agree that there was too much action but I don't think it detracted (or distracted) from the story and characters
5:Mal didn't let the Operative live out of mercy. He let him live so he could see the tape, and see how wrong he was. That was punishment, a far worse (and more meaningful) one that death.
6: Jayne has changed. Simple as that. He's still mostly out for himself but remember how he became more integrated and altruistic as Firefly went on? And remember how he feels about Reavers. He's a bad guy but he's not that bad. The Miranda incident would have horrified him.
7: The Alliance's main power seems to be that people believe in them. Even those that don't like the Alliance don't seem to hate them enough to act against them. Evidence of a planetary genocide is likely to change that.
8: Disagree with that the most, sorry. Fighting for causes often involves great personal sacrifice. Doesn't mean it aint worth doing. Like I said, Mal found something to believe i8n and fight for. I think the message is 'fight the good fight, regardless of cost'. Although, I wish we could have seen some concrete consequences: a mass defection of purple-bellies, some protests/ riots etc...
9: I din't find myself wishing for more Inara. Not a very inspired or sympathetic character IMHO. I did want to see more Book though. Oh, and bow and arrow. We know she's trained in fencing, why not archery?
All in all a superb film. Not perfect, but it's merits far outwayed its flaws.
"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I got something different out of that dream sequence, though not on first viewing. I think it harkens back to River's comment in the cargo hold: "He didn't lie down. They never lie down." Yet in the dream, she's being told to lie down by an authority figure (representing the Alliance) and is resisting.
Originally posted by DonCoat:Quote:
Was it just to bump the line "I coulda left her there?" Fits right in with the bit where River yanks herself out of the nightmare where the class lies down, and she's cuffed to the grid, then we cut to Mal waking startled as Wash yells that
Think I'm seeing ponies and plastic rockets?...goad, goad.
I see it as a playing-out of her schizophrenia. River knows about Miranda, but she's desperately trying to suppress that knowledge -- but her "neural stripping" makes that almost impossible. (She can't not feel.) So whenever she's placed in a situation that forces that knowledge to the surface, she deflects it, never stating the underlying truth -- the Reavers don't lie down (unlike the rest of the Mirandans). Little River won't lie down (though the Alliance is trying to force her to). It's going to get much much worse (when we all find out that awful knowledge).
One thing that's quite clear after repeated viewings: even River's craziest remarks aren't crazy at all. The brilliant part is: that's true even of the things she says in the Firefly episodes. Everything makes perfect sense once you have the key.
The only conclusion I can draw is that the events in Serenity were all clear in Joss' mind from the beginning. The story would have played out more slowly if the series had continued, but it would have come to the same place.
Anyway, back to your thoughts -- I didn't see it quite as you did, but it's entirely possible for Joss to write scenes that work on multiple levels at once. The "tore up plenty" exchange is a prominent example.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
Full thoughts and full deep breaths: always helpful, huh? The pixies took the last half of that line...when Wash yells to Mal on the com that he's going to bounce down a wave.
I completely agree with what you write about the meaning of her schizophrenia in the dream sequence, and about River not lying down when told to by the teacher, and I really like the way you put it. I meant that in addition to that, as she jerks awake the second time, Mal is also yanked awake in his bunk, and I wondered if, by that cut Joss was trying to indicate that they are connected - not just her being able to read his mind, but Mal being in River's head also.
I found River waking twice from that dream very spooky creepy. The first time she wakes, there's a snarling voice that says something like 'kill them all', and then she wakes again. This moment made me wonder if part of what's going on with the 'neural stripping' is that the nightmare is trying to drag her into itself - trying to make River into a reaver. As in "Bushwacked", the fellow the reavers made watch while they killed the rest of the passengers was turning himself into a reaver. The Stockholm Syndrome (identifying with your captors) taken to the logical, horrifying conclusion.
Also, speaking of the dream sequences (to spiral off on a tangent as usual) I think the classroom scene at the beginning of the movie with the kids talking about reavers, and little River's explanation that 'we meddle' is from a real memory. A point of fusion between her real life and the horror.
Also, I've thought better of the idea that Mal is being psychic, seeing River cuffed to the grate. I realized I'm seeing pixies here, and that's just a plain old device. In the dialogue between Mal and Book in the firelit scene on Haven, Mal's saying he could have left her, and the scene showing us by the agony on his face looking at her chained to the decking, that he never could have left her. Sorry, just temporary insanity. Sometimes things only come clearer for me after I write or sp
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dantheman:
Ignore Serenity completely and continue on from the last Firefly episode.
Don't people get that, eh, that's what Serenity *was*? If Firefly had continued, it would have looked a lot like the movie - people would have died, things would have changed. Why can't people accept that? Serenity was the continuation of the show, in movie-form.
Oh, and it wasn't 8 monthes between the show and the movie - it was closer to 2.
-Steve
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Steve580:
I believe it's been stated by 'official' sources (if not in the movie itself somehow) that the time frame from the end of OiS to Serenity is ~18 months...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I originally thought it was about 8 months, but there's a problem. In the movie itself, in the scene in the dining room just after River's freakout in the Maidenhead, Mal yells at Simon that he's had River on his boat for eight months. That would be eight months from Serenity (the pilot) to Serenity (the movie).
Originally posted by citizen:
Steve580:
I believe it's been stated by 'official' sources (if not in the movie itself somehow) that the time frame from the end of OiS to Serenity is ~18 months...
Either Mal's confused, or the time scale is a whole lot tighter than I originally thought.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ah, that's what I was thinking of, and I thought what he said was eighteen months...
means the time scales shorter than what I said, but still longer than 2 months...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Yes, I too think Joss has a really long view of the stories he tells. Where'd I read that Joss said the movie plot was season 2, mashed into a much smaller box? I think some things that will happen in season 12 of Firefly will be things that were part of his original imagining of a character. Not that I think his stories are rigidly imagined, I think he gets all bendy with them, but I think he begins with a pretty well realized structure of where it's probably going.
Yes. Of course, other writers work on his series too. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for the discussions -- "No, you can't have River doing that, because..."Or maybe, "You can't have River doing that, but I can't tell you why. Or I'd have to kill you."
Quote:I'm thinking of a scene (I think it's from Ariel) where she starts babbling about it being Christmas but they've taken the toys away, and left nothing but coal. It makes some sense for that scene alone, but takes on another whole layer now that we know the underlying cause of her madness. Maybe the stress of that moment has lowered her defenses and some images of Miranda are leaking through. Coal indeed!
I agree that everything River says makes sense once you have the context.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Ah, that's what I was thinking of, and I thought what he said was eighteen months...
means the time scales shorter than what I said, but still longer than 2 months...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
Wasn't the show over a span of six months? That was my understanding...I know it was near a month between Shindig and Safe alone...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The part I will never understand isn't the deaths of Book and Wash so much as their timing - in the first movie??!! It's the triumphant return from being gone and buried for 3 years and you're gonna start killing characters?? I was hoping for a movie that had a focus on what made these nine actors and characters so great together (as the best of Firefly did), and that that would hook the part of the audience that hadn't seen Firefly on wanting more. I think that's what all posters here wanted, from the gripers to the ever-faithful - more Firefly.
Serenity was not that, it was more "this is the big finale." And that possibility truly sucks.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
(WARNING: still very bitter about the whole gorram thing)
Quote:Good points all. It seems pretty simple, do'n'it? I already lived through all the characters dying when the show was cancelled, what's the point of killing off close to 1/4 of the cast in the first installment of a hoped for trilogy? It's just a crazy stunt! Makes me think Joss just went off his meds or something. Firefly was certainly one of the most suspenseful t.v. series the world has ever known, without a single one of the BDH's dying (well, 'cept Mal). I have no doubt that Joss might have killed either or both of these characters in the course of two or three seasons, but killing both of them the moment we get them back from the void of cancellation? I had no idea browncoats would be so masochistic, but, boy howdie, Joss sure did! Score, one for Joss; zero, for HK on that one.
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
The part I will never understand isn't the deaths of Book and Wash so much as their timing - in the first movie??!! It's the triumphant return from being gone and buried for 3 years and you're gonna start killing characters?? I was hoping for a movie that had a focus on what made these nine actors and characters so great together (as the best of Firefly did), and that that would hook the part of the audience that hadn't seen Firefly on wanting more. I think that's what all posters here wanted, from the gripers to the ever-faithful - more Firefly.
Serenity was not that, it was more "this is the big finale." And that possibility truly sucks.
Here's a thing: when the show was cancelled every incomplete plot thread and untold backstory was lost. Barring a miracle, none of it would ever be resolved. Didn't that suck? But the miracle came (in no small part, due to the work of us fans). Now, in the space of just one film, Joss has changed the landscape so much that we are in exactly the same spot all over again, because we may never get another installment. The only way I will be able to make sense of the shenanigans of Serenity is if I get a sequel--IF Joss desides to make sense of it at all. Heck, all he has to do is advance the story another 6 months and he won't have to deal with Zoe's grief; or maybe by then she'll be remarried to Simon, Kaylee will have moved back in with her dad and Inara will be pregnant and fans will eat it all up, quote Joss as saying that he intended all that to happen during seasons 4 thru 8 and call it brilliant, mind-blowing, best movie ever--as the openning credits scroll by, we can make bets on who'll get knocked off in this one!
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 | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
The part I will never understand isn't the deaths of Book and Wash so much as their timing - in the first movie??!! It's the triumphant return from being gone and buried for 3 years and you're gonna start killing characters??
I think you have to look at it from Joss' perspective: he's already had these characters and their story taken away from him once before. Do you really think he wants to rely on the hope that there may be sequels in order to get his story told? Or do you think he'd seize the chance and put the most important parts of the story that he wanted to tell in one film, just in case?
And, let's face it, "the story he wanted to tell" is the most important part here. Everyone has the right to dislike (or even hate) the film that Whedon and crew have given us, but in the end it is Joss' story, and he has to do what he feels is right. He's not our performing monkey. We can't tell him what he should or shouldn't do.
To quote the man himself, from the Visual Companion:
"You know, my original intent was that you never leave a man behind. Or woman. Dramatically, the more I worked on the screenplay, the more it became clear that in order to make people feel that this was real, a certain shocking thing is going to have to happen. [...] When you have an ensemble, you think about what people are going to take away with them at the end of the movie, and you don't think about the second movie until you've made the first one. [...] And you have to up the stakes, you have to make it real, you have to make it matter, and you cannot let your hope for a sequel guide what you're going to do in a movie, because it will lessen the chance that there will be one."
Also:
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
. . .quote Joss as saying that he intended all that to happen during seasons 4 thru 8 and call it brilliant, mind-blowing, best movie ever. . .
. . .snarky much? Don't forget the wise teachings of Buckaroo Banzai that are emblazoned at the end of your posts. . .
------------------
"Remember, there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
In another thread, I mentioned Batman Begins as a highly successful, cerebral, character driven action movie that made big, big bucks. To say that Joss had to make a popcorn movie just ain't so.
i don't think it's fair to compare Serenity to Batman Begins at all. Batman is a brand name - it's recognized and it's been around for a long time. it's audience is huge - just the excitment it generated before it's release is a testament to this. Firefly was a project that had it's feet loped off before it even got to crawl. i didn't see mcdonalds clammering to put Mal or Wash on their products.
i did leave the theater feeling a little disappointed. i think the first thing i said was "there wasn't much Joss Whedon in that". sure, it had his trademark kill a main character thing but the feel was certainly different. i had hoped for something a bit more like the series but i can't claim to understand how that crazy industry works. i have the utmost faith in Joss Whedon as an artist - he has yet to totally disappoint me. he is my god and the supreme ruler of all things awesome. so - i'm gonna assume he did what he did for a reason. if he had to change the flavour to get the movie out there (or if universal made demands after the project had already started)then so be it - it wouldn't have been the first time.
think back to the original Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie. (ya know - that travesty with Luke Perry) it was a shame and no one took it seriously but see what a deeply moving and all around awesome show the series became?
point is - big wigs and guys with the cash $ have always been a pain in the ass for artists everywhere.
i mean to say
-Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
Oh, and it wasn't 8 monthes between the show and the movie - it was closer to 2.
-Steve
actually i read somewhere that the movie takes place 6 months after Objects in Space.
outta curiosity - has anyone read the comics? they are supposed to bridge the gap between series and movie.
i mean to say
-Simon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
HK, I know you’re a bit sick of people responding to your posts on this topic, but I’ve got a few things to say about this one (and Pizmobeach’s). Might prove interesting to you.
If you go back through Whedon interviews before the film, when asked about sequels he always talks about wanting to get the first movie right because if it fails there won’t be any sequels. This was also Whedon’s approach to television. The first season of “Buffy,” Whedon felt they might not survive beyond a single season, so he focused all his efforts on telling a contained story within that first season so that if the show ended the story would be finished (as he’s mentioned a few times, he hates stories that are left unfinished). But while the first season was a self-contained story, Whedon also left a few threads dangling so if they beat the odds and came back next year, he’d have more story to tell.
Obviously, they did beat the odds, but they were still a bit shaky and Whedon decided that this system was a good idea. So from then on he always tried to write every season as if it were the last, while leaving a few threads unfinished for future stories if they got picked up for another year. Thus, every season could both stand alone and serve as a part of a grander cohesive whole. He used this again over on “Angel,” where it unfortunately proved useful when “Angel” was abruptly cancelled in its fifth year--the awesome (IMHO) series finale was virtually unchanged from the planned season finale. I’ve no doubt Whedon was going to use this same tactic on “Firefly,” especially given FOX’s bunglings. Had “Firefly” played out for a full season, it would’ve told a complete story, while laying the groundwork for a possible second season. The first season of “Firefly” was written as if it were the last, but FOX didn’t even let it get to the season finale which would have tied things together.
What I’m getting at here is that Whedon never assumes success, so I’ve no doubt he wrote the Big Damn Movie as if it were the Last Damn Movie. It’s not pulling punches for a trilogy since there’s a fair chance we won’t get one. At the same time, Whedon left threads for future movies--we don’t know the full effect Mal’s transmission will have on the Alliance, we don’t know Inara’s secret, we don’t know whether Mal and Inara will get together, whether Kaylee and Simon will stay together, and I’ve heard that Whedon also wants to (somehow) unravel Book’s past. But at the same time, two of the central arcs of the series--River’s storyline and Mal’s regaining some kind of belief--were answered and the film can stand alone.
So, Whedon wrote the film knowing full well that he might not be able to write more. That’s one reason why Book and Wash died in this one instead of a sequel--because there might not be sequels. Rather than holding out for a future that might not happen, Whedon tried to tell as much as could in this first installment. Some things were left out deliberately, others due to time constraints, and Whedon no doubt wants to write about them, too. But he also feels that his stories need to be able to stand on their own as well as fit into a greater whole. Going into this, Joss didn’t want to disappoint the fans and one thing that would’ve disappointed everyone is if he wrote “Serenity, Part I” and it failed, leaving the fans hanging in the middle of the story.
He’s obviously disappointed you, HK, and I’m sorry that’s happened. All I’m saying here is that Joss knew going in that there might well be no more installments and that shaped his writing. He had to focus on just a few core storylines to tell a complete story in one film, and much was left out that he’s no doubt itching to explore. We may never know everything, but having seen Joss’s other work, I doubt he ever wanted to tell us everything. A few mysteries, a few unanswered questions make it all the more interesting IMHO--just look at all the fun we’ve had speculating over the past few years!
EDITED TO ADD: Great, I sit down to write this long thing and I find tha
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
Yes. Of course, other writers work on his series too. I'd like to be a fly on the wall for the discussions -- "No, you can't have River doing that, because..."Or maybe, "You can't have River doing that, but I can't tell you why. Or I'd have to kill you."
I'm thinking of a scene (I think it's from Ariel) where she starts babbling about it being Christmas but they've taken the toys away, and left nothing but coal. It makes some sense for that scene alone, but takes on another whole layer now that we know the underlying cause of her madness. Maybe the stress of that moment has lowered her defenses and some images of Miranda are leaking through. Coal indeed!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
I'd like to be a fly on the wall for Shakespeare readings as well.
I went to find the bit below about the engine part to be sure I was remembering it just right, so I thought I'd take a sec to find the quote you're referencing, and it's even creeeepier.
"They took Christmas away. Came down the stairs for the shiny presents. They took the tree and the stockings. Nothing left but coal. Don't look in the closet either, it's greedy. It's not in the spirit of the holiday."
Holy Oak Massachusetts Rocky, that will give me nightmares.
Yeah, I'm going to go back and rewatch FF soon. Joss is always talking back and forth across the timeline. I watched an Angel season 2 episode tonight with friends ('Darla' was the title if I remember right), and there are tons of Angelis/Darla/Spike & Dru flashback scenes in it that were in various Buffy eps, told from different perspectives from how I'd originaly seen them. I do wish I had been there to see all 3 shows broadcast. There are things I'll always miss cause I didn't see how the shows played off one another [insert chamber music reference]. Anyway, I'll bet there's a lot of that in FF that I'm just not remembering. Then we'll all have more ideas to post about too!
Ok, example from Ariel about reflections across the timeline. One of my favorite bits from the show, too. When Wash and Kaylee are looking in the junkyard for the ambulance and Wash finds the part they needed in Out of Gas lying on the ground. He hefts it, wings it...and it hits an ambulance. In the movie's 'How's a guy get so wrong' scene when Jayne is dropping the parts from the reaver ship, Kaylee picks up that same part, and starts breaking it down. Love it, love it.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Ah, that's what I was thinking of, and I thought what he said was eighteen months...
means the time scales shorter than what I said, but still longer than 2 months...
Wasn't the show over a span of six months? That was my understanding...I know it was near a month between Shindig and Safe alone...
Yep, that's my understanding...
18 - 6 = 12 so I'd say it's about a year between film and series...
At least my recollection is that Mal said 18 months. I could be wrong...
Quote:
Originally posted by TunaBelly:
actually i read somewhere that the movie takes place 6 months after Objects in Space.
I'd heard something not too dissimilar.
Quote:
outta curiosity - has anyone read the comics? they are supposed to bridge the gap between series and movie.
Yes. It involves the Blue Hands and how the Operative got on the case...
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you Beeeer Milkshakes!
Even though I might, even though I try,
I can't
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by DonCoat:
I'd like to be a fly on the wall for the discussions -- "No, you can't have River doing that, because..."Or maybe, "You can't have River doing that, but I can't tell you why. Or I'd have to kill you."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't about you, Jayne. It's about what they need.
Verbification of a Noun!
Book thing, Novelization.
Feeling pretty stupid now, I mean I -assume- it is sanctioned by the powers of Joss. He does know it's out there, and the author did speak with him, yes? I suppose it would drive him to more than lettuce in the basement if he thought someone ruint his story, so yes he must have had some hand in it.
Here I've been, going off on the 800 tangents of speculation vector.
Soupguy mentioned it a couple of weeks ago, and I didn't find it right away. Last night I cracked it open, and by page 55 I can see that there will be much exposition for the hardcore, and the putting to bed of speculation about many things.
I can't not read it, but rats. It's more fun figuring out my own interp. On the other hand, boring the natives here. Not a good idea.
Flouncing off to read and ruminate, but not to hook up at the mall.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There are so many things I would like to argue! But doing so would take up a HUGE amount of time, space, and words, none of which will proabably convince you. I know that if I am really into something--be it a side of an argument, a show , or the like-- and think one thing with a strong passion, nothing will sway me from my ideas, my thoughts, my side.
I will say one thing though, that I don't really want to. I think that it's a sci-fi action movie is because, action sells. Yes, Joss does things for himself, and told the story because he needed to get it down, but let's face it, contemplation movies don't sell. I would love to believe that he did it JUST for the whole "I love this show and need it to go on," which is part of why he did it I think, he also knew that if he were to make Serenity like Firefly, in the contemplation way, in wouldn't sell in the mainstream.
And as for Wash's death...don't even get me started! I loved him, and as much as I do, his death WAS for a reason, it DID have a purpose and should not be so played down.
Just my thoughts.
Cheers,
~ForeverShiny~
~~~~~~~~~~~
Can't stop the signal!
"No, Cap'n, I think it's shiny!"--Kaylee, o'course.
"Yeah, but she's our witch, so cut her the hell down." --Mal in "Safe."
"Love. You can learn all the math in the 'verse, but you take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off as sure as the turning of worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughtta fall down, tells ya she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her a home." --Mal in "Serenity" My all-time fav quote. Love it!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I apologize if this has been said, I scanned the thread, but didn't read 100%.
I loved Serenity, and thought it held pretty true. Yes, I still can't seem to get over Wash's death, because I connected with him so much, but it had so many other meanings. He was part of the main comic relief and more importantly, he brought out Zoe's feminity. Yes, I'll miss "mmm...wife soup..." but this is a real chance for her character to take some turns. Its especially depressing because they had talked about children and family and all that stuff. Also from the writing aspect (and in terms of realism), I thought his death was perfect. No "10-minute-long-Neo-Trinity-death-scene-of-doom" ...he's impaled, he's dead.
But the most important part of him dying, was that it did something most films can't get across. When he died, it opened the door for the possibility of anyone and/or everyone dying. After that, Mal could've died, Jayne, Kaylee, etc. From a screenwriting standpoint, I feel it did it's job extra-well. Personally I would've killed off the doctor so that Mal could explore the "fatherly" figure that slightly peeks at the end of the film, but then you run into problems with the Kaylee factor and, its just too much.
As for Shepherd Book, I think *that* (his death) was especially needed because it shows the other side of Mal's character. The one that he covers up with the one that drives people who care about him away. I mean those lines whe he dies, its gut-wrenching, heartfelt and yet still subtily comedic.
Those are just my thoughts, yeah it sucked to lose someone and then a second, but I don't think we've seen the last of his character.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Just a note about Jayne. I think Jayne made a decision to follow Mal after Ariel. That convinced him Mal was worthy of his loyalty. And by asking him not to tell the others he gave away his feeling of family for them all. Jayne was as roped in as the rest of them to the destiny they all shared on this mission.
yeah, that. what they said.
no really, i totally agree with this. jayne changes after ariel, not a lot, but a little. none of the other characters are static in their development, and neither is jayne.
http://violetrix.blogspot.com
the arithmetic of absence
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME