The Movie Sucked

POSTED BY: adlai
UPDATED: Monday, January 9, 2006 06:36
VIEWED: 17893
PAGE 1 of 1

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:18 AM

I loved Firefly, don't get me wrong. It was some of the best television that I've ever seen, and the dialogue rivals that of early West Wing it's so good.

Serenity left me cold. Everything is so blue and the characters are similarly cold.

The strength of Firefly was that it was a Western dressed as Sci-Fi. It wasn't really sci-fi. Well, in the movie the sci-fi is amped up to there, while the Western is completely mute.

Probably the best metaphor for the movie would have to be the Prince of Persia games. Prince of Persia Sands of Time is I think the best game ever. But it didn't sell well for whatever reason, mostly due to poor marketing. In response, the next game, Warrior Within, had the sex and violence upped to 11... and it sucked because the charm of the game was gone.

This movie is like that. A second metaphor would be the killing of Wash. Wash was the unathletic Hawaian shirt wearing guy who was quirky and funny. Well, I guess the new Firefly has no room for him; he gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character. The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.

CAUSAL

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:23 AM

Oh, there's so much to respond to, but I'll limit myself.

#1: Wash wasn't killed because there was no place for him. Joss killed him because he wanted a real sense of danger in the final battle scene (and Joss is, of course, all about provoking real emotion). The standard come back to this is, "Well, why'd he have to kill of WASH?!?" Answer: don't know (but would you like some cheese with that whine?).

#2: Believe it or not, some people still have not seen Serenity, so it would be really good to put "spoiler" or some such in the thread title.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Editted to add: also, on a Firefly/Serenity type board, having the title "The Movie Sucked" is just aksing to be flamed and/or ignored. More flies with honey...

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

NUCKLES87

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:35 AM

While I am hoping the flaming is kept down here, I do have to disagree.

Serenity represented where Firefly was headed. Sure, the western theme was gone, but the western theme was mostly found on the outer worlds, places that the crew had very little time to visit in a three hour movie. Firefly was scifi dressed up with western nuances, not the other way around.

Serenity was what it was supposed to be: emotionally provoking. A huge finale for the Firefly story. People died, battles where fought. Joss did his very best to pull at the emotional strings of the fans and the viewers. And your anger at him towards killing Wash is proof that he accomplished what he set out to do. Kill a character that people cared about, and make them grieve.

NUCKLES87

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:35 AM

While I am hoping the flaming is kept down here, I do have to disagree.

Serenity represented where Firefly was headed. Sure, the western theme was gone, but the western theme was mostly found on the outer worlds, places that the crew had very little time to visit in a three hour movie. Firefly was scifi dressed up with western nuances, not the other way around.

Serenity was what it was supposed to be: emotionally provoking. A huge finale for the Firefly story. People died, battles where fought. Joss did his very best to pull at the emotional strings of the fans and the viewers. And your anger at him towards killing Wash is proof that he accomplished what he set out to do. Kill a character that people cared about, and make them grieve.

MATTIE

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:35 AM

I have one word for you: Troll!
Causal is right, you catch more flies with honey!
If you saw the intro that Joss did, you should take his advice and lay low, be quiet, don't speak for a long, LONG time.

Wacky fun!

NDRAGE85

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.

why wouldn't Simon be able to do any of that? in the series he did everything for River. He gave up everything and he did anything he could to protect her. In "Safe" he was ready to die along with her. So i don't see any of that as outlandish. and since when did that "grenade", as you put it, that he shoots off in the facility become complicated?

and Inara and the flash gernade makes perfect sense. it's just another companion trade secret. they were referenced in the show and Joss has often talked about them. just like the syringe in the pilot episode. companions have all sorts of tricks to protect themselves. they're companions, they have to have a way to protect themselves. it loses part of its allure to have a gone strapped to their side. that is why they have other means.

on a side-note though, i do understand your complaints about the loss of the western feel in the movie. while i don't see it the same way you do, i understand what you're saying.

LOOKATTHATBIRD

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:42 AM

I completely agree with you. I mean, I kind of liked the movie. I liked it much more the second time, seeing it again I focused less on the plot and more on the little things so I realised the characters had changed less than I thought originaly. But everything you said is so true. The whole blue thing was the worst. The show was all earthy and warm, at least when they were on the ship. The movie just felt bad. It was unsettleing. And since when is Mal so angry? And so disconcerned with the wellfare of his crew?

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:45 AM

What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

OMELET

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:

A second metaphor would be the killing of Wash. Wash was the unathletic Hawaian shirt wearing guy who was quirky and funny. Well, I guess the new Firefly has no room for him; he gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character. The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.

Firstly, It's not Enora, it's Inara.

Secondly, It was a typical thing for Inara to do because, if you listened to the commentary that was so brilliant by director Joss Whedon, then you would have learned that Inara was raised in the Alliance and nothing is what it appears. Yes she is a physically weak person compared to Mal, but she is clever and is constantly thinking the next moved through in her mind. Not only that, but she intuitively knows these things because of her Companion training, as mentioned by Joss as well. The ability to know when danger was coming was something second nature to her.

Thirdly, Simon only got into that fist fight because he was being a protective older brother to River. He was angry that she could have gotten killed and took his anger out on the one responsible person there, Mal. I wouldn't put it past Simon to be physical if he had to be. The so-called "Secret Operative" that you label Simon was also present in Firefly. Remember he was the one who designed the plan to steal from Ariel, not Mal or Zoe. Simon is quite protective of River, as shown in the episode Safe and Objects in Space. He was willing to beat up somebody to get his sister back or keep her safe. Also, it was mentioned that Simon was the one who busted River out of the place she was being held captive in Serenity, the pilot episode.

Fourthly, Serenity is a darker film than the Firefly series. Wash had to die to build that arc for Zoe and to make the movie more realistic so that it would appear that all of them might actually die. Alan Tudyk was even in on this decision, so it wasn't solely up to Joss. Yes Wash was beloved, but that doesn't mean that just because the "funny man who wears Hawaiin shirts" dies means that there won't be any more quirkyness when the show comes back or when the next movie is released. It just adds a sense of realism to the film that makes it more applicable to everyday life so that it doesn't feel like a sci-fi.

That's my 2 cents anyways.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

NDRAGE85

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

MOHRSTOUTBEARD

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:56 AM

The fact that you did not enjoy Serenity is fair enough. It is your opinion, and you are clearly welcome to it. However, though I don't doubt your feelings or your right to have them, I don't necessarily buy your reasoning for them. . .

Quote:
The strength of Firefly was that it was a Western dressed as Sci-Fi.

That's hardly the only reason Firefly succeeds as a work of art.

Quote:
[Wash] gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character.

Well, sometimes people get killed in abrupt and entirely inappropriate ways in real life.

Quote:
I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

People change. Tensions between Simon and Mal have obviously been raised in the interim between series and film, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that Simon would start standing up for himself more. As for him "setting off complicated grenades," it looked like all he had to do to trigger the 'bouncing betty' was to slam his baton on the floor. Not exactly rocket science.

Regarding "getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought," I direct you to the Operative's quote about Simon: "Madness, no. Something a good deal more dangerous. Have you looked at this scan carefully? At his face? It's love, in point of fact." We saw throughout the series that Simon was willing to do anything for River, including infiltrating a Core world hospital despite the possibility of capture. (Don't know how bright he is, top three percent, but he ain't weak and that's not nothing.)

And I'm sorry to hear that you think lighting a simple fuse is beyond Inara's capabilities.

PS: And in the time it took me to write my response, there were already eight replies. Shucks.

------------------
"Remember, there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over."

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

It's true that it is unrealistic to expect the movie to be exactly the same as the series. Things are different. At the same time... I think that it could have been better. Ever watch Babylon 5 movies? They weren't big screen affairs, but many were even better than individual episodes.

MUTT999

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:00 AM

Um, no, the movie didn't suck, it rocked. And it's Inara, not Enora.

"That's the buffet table....."

NDRAGE85

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
Quote:
Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

It's true that it is unrealistic to expect the movie to be exactly the same as the series. Things are different. At the same time... I think that it could have been better. Ever watch Babylon 5 movies? They weren't big screen affairs, but many were even better than individual episodes.

that is the hard thing though, Serenity was a big-screen affair, so it had to play by certain rules. i think if it was something like a made for TV movie, or straight to DVD movie, it could have kept some of those elements that were lost. The Firefly 'verse, while not overly complicated, it would have been too difficult to fully explain to a new audience in the span of 2 hours. it probably would have really come off as a half-assed explanation and would have left quite a few people confused about the fusion fo the western elements. as fans, we would have already been familiar with it. enough people were already scared off when finding out it was about a series. that means establishment, and that leaves a new viewer lost. like Joss said, "Serenity is not Firefly." A direct to DVD movie probably would have been able to hold the same feel because it is made for a core audience. a wide-release movie has different standards. for some that is good, for some it is bad. and for Serenity, some things had to be changed unfortunately.

JAYSONAYCH

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

Regarding Simon, it wouldn't be compelling if the characters didn't change a bit. What makes some series get stale is when the characters become static and predictable, and Firefly has been known for having well-written dynamic characters, so I'd be upset to see that some of the characters didn't grow a bit throughout the series. Simon didn't stand up too much for himself in the series, but you could see the fire there, and he did what he could within reason. He definitely could have been more assertive if he wanted to, but in the series, he's new to the outer worlds, new to the ship, and trying to find his way. He's not stupid...he fell into a pretty good situation and had to try to fit in and make nice with the Captain. But to say he didn't have the capability...well, he gave up everything he had to save his sister and put himself into very dangerous situations, so it's not like he was a complete milquetoast...just that compared to how the crew of Serenity were living life, he had a lot to learn about the culture shock and couldn't make too many waves and jeopardize his situation. However, in the 7-8 months that elapsed between the series and the movie, given all the tension flowing in that time, it's not at all unreasonable that, after being comfortable with his new life and getting sick of some of the things going on, that he'd stand up to Malcolm, especially in matters involving his sister. I think it's perfectly natural for things to have evolved to that point in that time.

NEVERED

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:18 AM

if you listen to the DVD commentary, you also learn that the presence of simon and river on serenity means that they've had to stay away from the central planets, declining jobs that would put them in alliance spotlight.

mal is touchier and angrier in the movie than he is in the series because he's making a lot less than he would if the Tams weren't on board, and they're just barely scraping by.

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:18 AM

that is true. And I would be fine with that except that the scene where Simon is playing secret operative is a flashback scene, not a present scene. All it would have taken to keep it true in spirit would have been a short shot showing his hesitation, his overcoming his meek nature. I have the feeling that the whole project was also very rushed.

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by nevered:
if you listen to the DVD commentary, you also learn that the presence of simon and river on serenity means that they've had to stay away from the central planets, declining jobs that would put them in alliance spotlight.

mal is touchier and angrier in the movie than he is in the series because he's making a lot less than he would is the Tams weren't on board.

Except that he doesn't show anger at all during the duration of the series. This sudden anger is new and forced (perhaps also a result of Fillion playing a villain in Angel during the interim period?)

NDRAGE85

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
that is true. And I would be fine with that except that the scene where Simon is playing secret operative is a flashback scene, not a present scene. All it would have taken to keep it true in spirit would have been a short shot showing his hesitation, his overcoming his meek nature. I have the feeling that the whole project was also very rushed.

yeah, i think you're sort of right there. they could have showed him being a little nervous and hesitant in the rescue. but on the other side, he had to be in character for the rescue. he was a high-ranking alliance official. he couldn't show any signs of nerviousness or weakness, it would have been a give away. i did like his big flinch when they shoot a laser at the glass when they're escaping on the platform though.

FIREFLYPASSENGER

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:35 AM

I am guessing you only saw Serenity once.

It really takes a second look to see the beauty in Serenity. Serenity is not Firefly, even Joss says that. But Serenity is definitely worth another look. The first time it goes by so fast. The second time you can see a lot more happening.

Joss is all about the layers.

FIREFLYPASSENGER

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:35 AM

Ooooooh yay. I haven't been here in a long time. I love this edit function.

May Serenity Keep Flying.

DRAVAS

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:40 AM

The gloves have come on everyone is rushing to the defense. One person can look at the Mona Lisa and say the love it while another person can look at it and say its a bunch of crap.

NOTE: Point of view no realivance that I like or do not like the Mona Lisa and should be used as a referance and example.

so if you are a bit shady some of the aspects of why things changed lets go into them.

We never seen the core worlds just tiny glimpsys of the core...The hospitol job, and the antique laser gun job. There may be more but they do not come to mind right now.

As for working complicated garande let me introduce you to the united states claymore which has written on it "point toward enemy". All weapons have thier instruction manuals and are made to be used by the simplist soilder, which around 18-23 with an average IQ of Janye. So is it beyond Simon and Inra to work anytype of weapon.

As for the punch and fighting... WOW one punch ... thats all I seen him do though out the movie. Simon supresses his emotions when you do that a long time you snap and when you snap you get violent and being a geeky guy Simon's violence is one punch.

Planing ops is not beyond Simon being a doctor in the core worlds and using all his money, playing pretend and paying for the stun garnade and a ship to risk to transport them out is not beyond his capacity.

No cowboys and guns...Strange beginning then... anyways the fact that cowboysim is not a major part is because we are dealing more with the core worlds. Just think of this movie as a ep in a core world.

Mal the darker mal. He lost inra, he lost the sheapered and his guidance. Kinda why he was on edge in the begining of the movie. Mal is also a man of war you only see him go dark after New Heaven is attacked. Before that he tells us that when he goes to war you will know. He was going to war after the attack and you see he was durning the war the darker version, the one that lost all but one in his platoon in the battle of Serenity.

As for wash meeting his maker trust me it hurt as for a inapporate death define an approate death to me.

I enjoyed the movie not everyone is going to like it, but let it be and lets not argue the point.

Remember

Some People Juggle Geese

NOSADSEVEN

Saturday, January 7, 2006 6:08 AM

Adlai, I'm curious to know how long ago you saw the movie, and how many times. I definately had a period of adjustment to get used to it. I saw an advanced screening back in June, and when the US poster was released I remember people who hadn't seen the movie yet complaining that the poster didn't reflect Firefly's warmth. I remember thinking, "Well, I really couldn't describe Serenity as warm." So I get that "cold" feeling you mention.

That being said, I have really grown to love and appreciate the movie. The change in tone and pace from Firefly was so jarring to me at first, that I felt like it was missing it's soul. But after (months later) having the chance to see it again (and again, and again...), I noticed many of those little moments and "swirls" that I had missed the first time.

Anyway, the changes in tone are due to differing nature (and demands) of movies vs. tv shows. It was the constraints of telling a 2 season story arc with nine distinct characters in 2 hours to fans and newbies alike to blame, not heavy-handed execs. (Unless you're referring to the FOX execs that killed Firefly in the first place.)

Anyway, if you get a chance to see it more, and digest it more, you may gain a different perpective of it. If you already have seen it multiple times over the course of months, and still have problems, well, then we can debate!

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't. We. Just.

SNEAKER98

Saturday, January 7, 2006 6:29 AM

Umm...

They essentially robbed a BANK in the opening. I can't really think of anything more western... except perhaps the quickdraw standoff between Mal and The Operative.

I suggest, the next time you watch Firefly, you start noticing the difference between the Core and the Outer worlds. Pay close attention to Ariel; it's Western element is very, very sparse because they're in "civilized space".

As for Wash's death, well that was the moment Joss went "Look, this isn't Star Trek.". And also the moment I went "Thank you!"

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

ITSBROKEN

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:06 AM

I see that there is no ranting on this post yet which is very good considering the title seems like it is inviting flamers. However i do suggest putting SPOILER across the top cause as it was said, some people havent seen the movie yet. just to be curtious

-----
***someone should make a MMORPG based on the 'verse!***

Geeze i want Firefly to come back!

-----

WASTEGATE13

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:21 AM

Wouldn't it be weird if they pulled a Macross and Serenity was actually a movie in the FireFly verse? I don't know how many of you are familiar with Anime but Shoji Kawamori did this with his series and the later film. He explained it as being "a theatrical retelling of the events of Macross". Perhaps Serenity is a "theatrical retelling" of a period in the life of our BDH's, a little dramatized and exaggerated to make it more appealing to a mainstream audience. Just something to think about.

"Jayne's a girl's name."

ANDRE83

Saturday, January 7, 2006 2:02 PM

Well, personally i think the fact that you even mention Wash just makes your whole argument flawed. Personally i think you are just mad because he died.

Like so many was - which is stupid imo. His death had a great impact - so it served its purpose.

Go play with your rainstick.

Jayne: All those years of preacher training, getting knocked out by one bounty hunter
Book: Oh, dont get me wrong. I gave him a hell of a fight
Jayne: Epic i'm guessing

LOCRAY

Saturday, January 7, 2006 2:37 PM

I have something to say about Simon and about the killing of Wash leading to less jokes and fun...

If you have not noticed, Simon is not only the little geek he seems to be. When he is comfortable he is actually quite funny. You notice him becoming more and more comfortable as the series move on, and him also delivering more jokes. The contrast is especially clear in Pilot, where he is extremely "uncomfortable" (didn't come up with a better word) during the entire episode. But then, when he's going to fix Kaylie (how the hell did you spell that again?) he even stands up to Mal, because he is in his "homefield", in a nursery. Where he feels at home, and in there he feels comfortable.

The ship feels more and more home for him during the show and he becomes less and less geeky. So he hits the captain. So he delivers some more jokes. So him, plus a possible new character (to become the pilot of Serenity?) could way up for the loss of Wash when it comes to jokes.

Other than that, the movie was definetly not as good as the series. It was too... too... too Hollywood, everything packed together on what felt like minimum time and maximum action and happenings. Though I still loved the movie, it just didn't live up to the series.

CAPTKAR

Saturday, January 7, 2006 2:49 PM

One thing everybody has to understand is that the movie was made that way on purpose. The characters were supposed to be darker because they were pushed to the raggedy edge, not alot of jobs going to 'em, Books gone so they don't really have that same decision making ability they had when he was on the ship, and Inara is gone so Kaylee (the happiness and warmth of the crew) doesnt have that "friend-to-go-to".

Also the movie was supposed to be a faster paced more SciFi oriented movie, because Joss hoped that the people going to the movies and seeing Serenity would be more people than just the loyal Browncoats. Making the movie faster/more action-packed would hopefully draw more people to the FF/Serenity verse, thus sperring on more support for another movie or hopefully another series (not Firefly because as Joss said it was over) but maybe a Serenity series.

Finally the movie is over and done with (meaning its already been made and showed) so theres no need to start some arguments about whether or not you liked it much less throwing around insults or God-Forbid trollage, just state your peace and go on about your eerie ass day.

Thanks for listening to my hopefully not ill-fated attempts at making peace and my opinion on the movie

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

CAUSAL

Saturday, January 7, 2006 3:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
Except that he doesn't show anger at all during the duration of the series. This sudden anger is new and forced (perhaps also a result of Fillion playing a villain in Angel during the interim period?)

Now I'm starting to wonder if you've even seen the series. Mal gets mad:

Serenity Parts 1 & 2
He decks Simon in the cargo bay.
He punches Simon for suggesting that he should be working for the Alliance.
He shoots Patience's horse, sticks a gun in her face, and takes the purse ("I do the job, then I get paid").

The Train Job
Kicking Crow into the engine? Hello?

Bushwhacked
Clearly upset when Commander Harken accuses him of killing the settlers, not believing that Reavers killed them.

Shindig
Mal coldcocks Atherton Wing for implying that Inara is a whore. Oh, and point of interest, stabs him twice after winning the duel.

Our Mrs. Reynolds
Whacks Saffron in the side of the head with the gun.

Out of Gas
He's pretty clearly upset when talking to Captain of the Walden (who shot him in the gut), after he's found the gun and turned the tables on the other crew.

Ariel
Seems a mite angry at Jayne, who turned on his crew.

War Stories
When he's beating up Niska he seems pretty pissed.

Trash
After Monty's ship leaves, the whole exchange with Saffor/Bridgit makes it pretty clear that he's been harboring some anger toward her ever since she hijiacked his ship and tried to kill them all.

Heart of Gold
After Burgess has shot Nandi, Mal chases and catches up with him. Beats him up, then lets Petaline shoot him in cold blood.

Is that enough to demonstrate that Mal has always had some anger to him?

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

CAPTKAR

Saturday, January 7, 2006 3:21 PM

Going along with the whole anger-issue in Serenity. It would make Mal seem in-human and more or less robotic if he didnt get angry when:

1) he gets punched in the face after they all come back safe from a near death experience with Reavers

2) He gets the percent upgrade for the middle-man so he loses money

3) Seemingly his crew begins to turn on him when he says Simon is gone and he dont care

4) Book gets killed be the Operative

5) He finds out the Alliance which he hates so mush created Reavers by trying to force people to be more peaceful just like they did with the war

6) and finally he gets stabbed with a sword. I think that would piss anybody off dont you.

If anybody could go through all that and not show one hint of emotion they wouldnt be human. Or they would be a Sociopath which i dont think Mal is.

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

PDCHARLES

Saturday, January 7, 2006 3:39 PM

OK.. Serenity <> Sucky Movie..

Are u out of your mind? (still a non-flaming opinion respecter) The movie took some very obvious turns that would have inevitably played out in the series and the “extra” dialog for non-firefly fans was short and sweet. There was not enough time to get ALL western on ya. It would not have made sense to have Miranda be a poor outer moon or the have reavers chillin’ in a saloon playin’ Faro.

Hey if we didn’t have Simon getting all, as u say, “secret operative”, we would have no River. He gave us an executive summary of an explanation in the series of how he got her out. This doesn’t seem so out of the norm. Having the real alliance operative in the movie explain the “look of love” on his face really defines Simon I think.

And thanx Casual and Captkar
Mal = Anger… (Not defining him as one-dimensional) a character trait I would have expected in the movie.

U gonna be smart here Riva!?!

CAPTKAR

Saturday, January 7, 2006 3:43 PM

I love it when im not the only "voice-of-reason" hehe

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

ADLAI

Saturday, January 7, 2006 6:16 PM

You know, the extras did make me laugh... the outtakes were hillarious too. The one moment when Nathan Fillion is ordering the crew to adorn the ship with bodies... he goes to Kaylee and is like, "I want the baby Jesus on the top" or something like that with a straight face, and she just starts cracking up.

The cast realized how forced and silly the script was also.

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

CHRISTHECYNIC

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:07 PM

Something here is pissing me off, and it isn’t that someone said the movie sucked (though that irks too.)

Simon in the series was a guy who would jump off a catwalk, or get into a fistfight with a well trained armed bounty hunter after he (Simon) had already been shot. He was the sort of guy who was willing to die by fire or risk Kaylee’s life for River.

We’ve always known he would punch Mal if the occasion warranted because he has never been afraid to die (something we have known from the first episode) and Mal isn’t the type to do anything worse than kill him.

If I had to pick something as out of character it would be that he didn't kill the doctors. Given how far he is willing to go and what they did to River it would only make sense to kill them. However the series clearly showed that he was not a killer at that point, while he might kill for River he had not done it yet.

Of course that really shows how not-badass Simon was in the intro, he went into a place and made sure that he wasn't carrying a single lethal weapon. Which is really exactly what we expect from the Simon of the series, he'll jump off a catwalk knowing full well that such a fall could easily kill or cripple him, but he'll hesitate to pull the trigger. Truely this is the kind of guy who would walk into a facility where they would kill him if they found him out, but not use lethal force while there.

If you missed the point, the thing that at first seems out of character to me is totally in character, and I can not think of anything else that even seems out of character for him.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lookatthatbird:
And since when is Mal so angry?

Watch the episode Serenity again. Mal was like that in the beginning of the series.

Of course the entire movie was a happy cheery version of Mal when compared to the end of Ariel.

CHRISTHECYNIC

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:20 PM

Oh, a little "by the way" here.

Nathan Fillion never appeared on Angel. You're thinking of Buffy which was a very different show. (Buffy's goal was to kill demons; Angel's was to save the innocent. They used the same method, but the distinction created very different dynamics.)

While no one here will ever demand you watch either show (being a Firefly fan does not require it) it would be nice if you would make sure you speak the truth, little falsehoods make you seem troll-like because they imply that you do not care about what you are saying.

I’m not calling you a troll, I do not believe you to be one, but I think it will help others continue to recognize that you are not one if you try to be more accurate. This is a sensitive issue and it helps to be precise.

If an angry person were to read that you said Nathan was on Angel they might jump to the conclusion that you had no idea what you were talking about and were just saying everything based on shoddy second-hand information. Things like that have happened before.

WASTEGATE13

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:21 PM

So no one likes my Macross theory?

"Jayne's a girl's name."

CENTURYHOUSE

Saturday, January 7, 2006 8:34 PM

I had never seen the Firefly series when I saw the movie "Serenity".

The movie was good enough to make me go out and buy the Firefly DVD set AND the Serenity movie DVD.

That said, I do think the series was warmer and more nuanced but that's to be expected.

Check out my songs:
http://www.thelightningwaltz.com

http://www.myspace.com/crash_sun

DRAVAS

Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:04 PM

In the words of Wash

Some People Juggle Geese

OMELET

Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

J6NGO1977

Saturday, January 7, 2006 10:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Omelet:
Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

Yep I agree. You hit the nail on the head. Serenity aint Firefly. As I said before If I was stranded on a desert island with a DVD player (it was in a water tight case. don't argue .lol) and I had a choice between Serenity and 1 episode of Firefly. Give me 'Out of Gas' every time

OMELET

Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by j6ngo1977:
Quote:
Originally posted by Omelet:
Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

Yep I agree. You hit the nail on the head. Serenity aint Firefly. As I said before If I was stranded on a desert island with a DVD player (it was in a water tight case. don't argue .lol) and I had a choice between Serenity and 1 episode of Firefly. Give me 'Out of Gas' every time

Thank you. I agree completely, except I would choose Objects in Space for the sheer fact that Simon looks fantastic without his shirt on.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

CHRISISALL

Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

"You want to run this ship?!"
What was the answer to Mal's question? And what did he reply to that with?
Non-sequeter, your facts are un-co-ord-ina-ted.
It WAS quirky, and it WAS western-y (and BTW, IT WAS GREAT).
Did you also not like Objects In Space because Mal got beat up and knocked out- it never happened before that!
Did you dislike Ariel for it's lack of horses?

You know, I'm gonna go all purist myself and say that only the pilot is real 'Firefly', everything else is an abberation or perversion of the original idea (ie, no change or growth allowed).

Really, what did you want, a movie with no tension or climax? A long re-make of Train Job but with an extended campfire scene?

(come to think of it, I do like campfire scenes)Chrisisall

CHRISTHECYNIC

Sunday, January 8, 2006 2:08 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
You know, I'm gonna go all purist myself and say that only the pilot is real 'Firefly', everything else is an abberation or perversion of the original idea (ie, no change or growth allowed).

There is actually some truth to that. The episodes of series, after Serenity, and the movie were all significantly lighter than the original vision. I'd point you to Inara's intended encounter with the Reavers if I remembered the link.

Clearly the movie was far too much of a happy-cheery sugar-coated affair to be worthy of the Firefly crew and fans.

ADLAI

Sunday, January 8, 2006 2:53 AM

I actually thought that Objects in Space was probably the strongest episode (well, maybe aside from the pilot).

Whedon's strength is his unconventional writing, like how he breaks conventional structure (though I believe Tim Minear wrote Objects in Space... ) anyways, I suspect that Whedon decided to "play it safe" in writing Serenity. I can understand why, but I'm still disappointed.

GEDEON

Sunday, January 8, 2006 3:02 AM

Wow, with all these people responding, I just hope somebody noticed the kid has a point. We all love the 'verse so much, expectations were perhaps too high. Then again, some people don't watch the news because they don't want to know...

Gedeon

CHRISISALL

Sunday, January 8, 2006 3:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:

Clearly the movie was far too much of a happy-cheery sugar-coated affair to be worthy of the Firefly crew and fans.

That scene in Serenity where all those cuddly space-bunnies made friends with the Alliance soldiers and got them to stop chasing Mal out of sheer goodness of the soul killed it for me.

It's too dark.
It's too light.
Sheesh, it ain't easy bein' Joss, I guess.

Chrisisall!

ADLAI

Sunday, January 8, 2006 4:29 AM

I'm watching it a second time. I don't mind the changes so much the 2nd time around... but I have to say that it still pales in comparison to the series.

A few more things. Why is Jayne suddenly so smart? He has actuall comebacks to the captain like "when have your plans ever gone right?"

And since when did they get a nifty little hovercraft? especially if they're running out of money. Firefly of old was charming because it was spaceships corralling cattle, where after they landed they rode horses.

also, quick plothole: if Reavers are so hyper aggressive, how do they get so organized in the first place that they don't kill each other?

Although, I have been too hard on the movie. It is vastly superior to the new Star Wars movies, though I've never seen Star Trek movies. It is better than the Farscape miniseries. Much, much better than the miniseries.

if this helps, The New Republic has a glowing review of Serenity (site's down right now, just do a search) though I think that the critic was a Firefly virgin.

I still don't like the new direction of the series though. When it becomes one of those "fate of the galaxy" type shows, it automatically becomes more Sci-fi. Again, Firefly was a Western with some Sci-Fi dressings. Whedon himself criticized sci-fi (in one of the Firefly DVD extras) as "stand back and look"

In one of the extras, he says that the inspiration for Firefly was a Civil War book.

one more thing. Action without emotional context is just dance. I (and most peopl) find watching dance extremely boring.

ADLAI

Sunday, January 8, 2006 4:39 AM

one more thing. look at this

http://www.slate.com/id/2127162/

and then this

http://imdb.com/name/nm0923736/

He's a much better TV writer than a movie writer. The rule is Film is the realm of the director and TV the realm of the writer, and reality the realm of the casting director.

His movie credits include Alien 4 and Titan AE. Both space sci-fi epics dealing with spaceships and stuff... Serenity shows a more sci-fi turn, unfortunately. If a new series were announced I'd still probably tune in... Firefly truly is dead though

NISKAANDEBERT

Sunday, January 8, 2006 5:03 AM

The movie took off from where the series ended. Joss obviously wanted to create closure. The major cliffhange left by the series was"what is the deal with River?" Myself--I loved seeing River get to kick some serious ass. As far as killing off wash and Book--JW knew it was a feature film--and his last chance--there would be no sequel. He had to make it interesting for people who'd never seen the series--like me.

NISKAANDEBERT

Sunday, January 8, 2006 5:08 AM

The movie took off from where the series ended. Joss obviously wanted to create closure. The major cliffhange left by the series was"what is the deal with River?" Myself--I loved seeing River get to kick some serious ass. As far as killing off wash and Book--JW knew it was a feature film--and his last chance--there would be no sequel. He had to make it interesting for people who'd never seen the series--like me.

LIMINALOSITY

Sunday, January 8, 2006 5:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wastegate13:
So no one likes my Macross theory?

Yeah, I liked it. In fact this would be a Joss kind of thing to do (imo)

Characters grow, people grow, at least I hope to the powers that be that all this agony I slog through pays off in actual growth! Sometimes growth means going through rough periods where you seem to be out of character when you:
are angrier and more unreasonable than usual (Mal),
pick up a weapon that was in your trunk on Serenity (Inara), stab Mal with a syringe and punch him in the face (Simon)
shoot a weapon (Kaylee and Simon)
check to see if everyone is strapped in when the ship is in freefall (Jayne)
put your brother's lights out (River)
kill people by shooting down a ship (Book)
move beyond the line seeking revenge (Zoe)
...because some force to be reckoned with presses you into a corner.

All ideas of the inherent differences between series/movies aside, Joss stories are never tame and predictable, which is part of what makes his work so remarkable. He'll do things every one of us disagrees with in the interest of telling a great story. This is easeir to accept with a fait accompli, so it gives me at least a little joy that some of y'all are still ranting about how much you hate the things Joss did in the movie. It means you perceive FF as a living creation, and not at all a deal dead and done. I don't see much bitching about the things people didn't like about, say, Jaynesville.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!

OOKAMIKAWAHARA

Sunday, January 8, 2006 5:31 AM

Adlai,
I hate to tall ya this, but you are reading way way too freaken much into this here thing. You didn't like the movie fine got no prob with that. A bunch of examps though either I don't follow or see. Having seen both series and movie, actually saw the movie first loved it and brought me rest of way in to verse. As to your question of the Reavers heres a question for ya, have you ever heard of a battle called Mogadishu (sp?) ie Black Hawk down. How do you think the Somalie's brought down those Choppers? The milita that the Warlord had as his army/body guards were hyped up on drugs. When the op went down, they were at the height of the drug induced effects also a local Weapons bizzar was 2-3 blocks away. Thus we have ancient and modern day versions of the Reavers(refering to how much they are feared). Having them opporate a ship is not much of a strech or be able to patch up a ship. How do you think the civilizations/groups that practiced canabalism survived for the time that they did? There must have been something there huh. As to craft maybe they bought it in between. Remember the movie is supposed to take place a couple of months after the last episode. Thus in that time they could have stole,bought or some how gotten it. Its funny for everyone of your questions here I have at least one or more answers that work for me. Anyways hope you would take another look at it. To me your not enjoying the movie as it is and instead just nitpicking it to death. zannen ne. Everything is a dance, should try it sometime. Even in a sword fight were the intent is to spill the other guys blood, its still a dance (I should know since I do Japanese fencing Kendo)Trust me you ain't seen dancing yet till ya see what I and other people even more talented can do with it.
mata, Ookami yori

Surren have some interesting thoughts going on here.
Dancen?? Try Dancen when your facing a boy intent on spilling your blood w/ two blades and you only got one!

EMBERS

Sunday, January 8, 2006 4:39 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by niskaandebert:
Joss obviously wanted to create closure. The major cliffhange left by the series was"what is the deal with River?"

I also felt that one of the big questions from the series is WTF is up with those Reavers?
I LOVED the resolution of the Reaver question...
I thought that that was amazing,
and totally believable (governments today wouldn't hesitate to try that on us...if they could only figure out a way...)

**********************************************
CHRISISALL:

Quote:

Really, what did you want, a movie with no tension or climax? A long re-make of Train Job but with an extended campfire scene?

actually what I would have REALLY liked is a movie like 'My Dinner with Andre' only having it be our BDHs sitting around a table, eating a good meal, and talking for two solid hours...
written by Joss that would have been great...
can't you just see it?

sigh

RUXTON

Monday, January 9, 2006 4:45 AM

Liminalosity

Re: "Sometimes growth means going through rough periods where you seem to be out of character...." ff.

You have remarkable insight and a fine manner of expressing yourself. You see things that bounce off my subconscious, and I find myself asking, "Why didn't I see that?"

SERGEANTX

Monday, January 9, 2006 5:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by adlai:
one more thing. look at this

http://www.slate.com/id/2127162/

Thanks for he link. Excellent article.

I haven't read all through the flurry of responses here, and I'm not sure I agree with every point you make, but I share your disappointment with the movie. If you have the DVD I'd watch a couple more times. It does get better, and there's still some of Whedon's great writing squeezed in there, but much of it was left out to make room for pointless action sequences. (Gotta keep the short attention span crowd from drifting - look at the monkey, look at the monkey!).

I think you'll find quite a lot of the fans left on the board are more interested in making excuses for the film rather than just admitting it wasn't all that great and considering why. I've actually come to like the movie and even found a few scenes within it that hit that magical place the series nailed so consistently. The final exchange between Mal and River is particularly reminiscent of the Firefly. But overall, while it's a good action/sci-fi movie on its own, it's pretty disappointing as a follow up to such a great series.

The most popular excuse is it HAD to be that way because it's a MOVIE. I don't buy that at all. It has to be that way if you insist on it being a fast paced action movie, but I don't get why that was the logical choice. It certainly wasn't what made the series so good.

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

CALIXUS

Monday, January 9, 2006 5:56 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
In fact this would be a Joss kind of thing to do (imo)

This response is going to include a bit of what you might call a spoiler. But it's a spoiler that I use to ease my cold empty about Wash.

Another 'Joss thing' he mentioned in one of his commentaries in Buffy - no one really ever dies in his world. So I d*** well expect to see all of them again. Or I'm gonna be irritable and hard to light.

It's interesting to see how identity gets formed around texts/sports/nation/etc. By critiquing a movie in which emotion has been invested, it can become a personal attack, rather than a discussion of ideas. I'm glad to see everyone left the napalm in the cargo bay. It doesn't really smell like victory...

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

ADLAI

Monday, January 9, 2006 6:04 AM

ack! this message board, and Firefly have taken over my life for the past week! I'm starved for a 2nd season!!

I'm sad that Book and Wash are dead. Wash was mainly comic relief... but Book's death is unforgivable, mainly because it kills off the thread of exploring his past. And yes, they are forever dead... Buffy after all was about supernatural demons and such. Of course, there is always clones...

Watching Serenity again, I've grown accustommed to it. And on balance it is better than most new Hollywood movies that I've seen recently (I've found that tv serials are vastly more satisfying than movies). Still, from an objective POV it's not as good as Firefly, and I don't like all the changes though I've accepted them.

This is going to be my last post in a long time (need to get back to real life!), I guess making me a "troll". Anyways, g'luck browncoats, I'm on your side :)

LIMINALOSITY

Monday, January 9, 2006 6:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
You have remarkable insight and a fine manner of expressing yourself. You see things that bounce off my subconscious, and I find myself asking, "Why didn't I see that?"

Thanks, Rux. That was a swell thing to write.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!

OLDSOUL1987

Monday, January 9, 2006 6:36 AM

OK... i have to say i some what agree with you, i love the show but i would rather the movie would not have happend. that instead we got another seasson worth of the show that was not so rushed, so sloppy. but it was not all bad, it gave some of the characters more depth and it gave us more info on the world... i just think it could have been done better. If character were going to die i don't mind much as long as they go in a better fashion, something not so weak. but as for 'Inara' (NOT 'Enora' or how ever you spelled it.) she is a companion suposedly train in many arts even combat, tough not as traind as most other might be, any way to get to the point i think the inscens thing was silly, and they made her seem like she could not fight when she should have done a bit better (but not much.) She should have picked up a sword or knives we all know she was good at that. any way, to the point i think its shiny we got a movie i am thankful for it but it could have been better, i expected better. The movie had plenty of holes and i missed the western feel of it and you are so right simon was off in the movie (in janes town he could not lie to a mudder, in the movie he infiltrated a high security facility!) any way i think its nice to have it just for referance as in where joss might have taken the world but i myself would not bye the DvD unless there was the chanse of getting a new seasson or even a 2nd movie.

"mal if your being a gentilman i might die of shock" -inara
"so there is kissin involved" -mal
"Him... oh im sorry you were gona ask me to choose right?" -zoe
"a special hell reserved for child molesters and people who talk at the theaters" -book
"likely crash and kill us all" -wash
"How can we know untill we question it?" -Kaylee
"Dummy" -simon
"No power in the verse can stop me" -River
"is any one there.... anybody else" -Jane