are fans boycotting the movie? (major spoilers)

POSTED BY: XanderHarris
UPDATED: Thursday, October 20, 2005 16:27
VIEWED: 20975
PAGE 5 of 9

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE

SOUPCATCHER

Friday, October 7, 2005 8:28 PM

Hey HKCavalier! It’s been a while (probably because I haven’t been over to the RWED much lately) and it’s nice to be reminded of how much I enjoy reading your thoughts .

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Not to put too fine a point on things here, but if an actual Reaver had crashed through the windshield and sunk his claws into Wash forcing the stunned crew into action, the death would have seemed less random. On a narrative level I wouldn't be wondering what even happened. As it was, it was a kind of a Deus Ex Machina minus the Deus. I would go so far as to say that Joss intended to grind exactly the existential axe that many here have been proclaiming--"Death is terrible and sudden and comes out of nowhere!" I dare say that he wants us to see the death as senseless as part of an angry point he's making about existence.

Yeah, I hear you. And I had the same reaction my first time although I swear they’ve changed that scene somewhat. When we first watched the movie I don’t remember them showing the Reaver ship at all. It was just: Bam; Wash is dead; Zoe goes to his side; Mal pulls her away; Second spear comes through; They’re running. I had no clue what killed Wash. It could’ve been that I was just so shocked that I wasn’t processing the next few seconds of the movie (does anyone else remember if they showed the Reaver ship touching down in front of Serenity and firing the second spear during the May 5th pre-screening?).

And I initially did think the death was random but I’ve changed my mind after watching the movie a few more times. I’m now convinced that the only reason I was so surprised was because of the powerfulness of the crash-landing scene. We shouldn’t be surprised that the Reavers are still coming. The crew shouldn’t be surprised that the Reavers are still coming. All the indications we’ve gotten from the show and the movie are that they keep coming until they’re all dead (paraphrase, “If we run they’ll chase us. It’s their way,” etc.). But the loss of control and the threat of dying is so great and it’s just so amazing that Wash managed to save them from crashing that we, and the crew, let down our guard, breathe a sigh of relief and think, “Phew. They made it.” But they haven’t yet. And that split second of relief at thinking that it’s over is what costs Wash his life. Everyone forgets the bigger threat, the Reavers. And so we’re shocked when it’s forcibly brought to our attention that the battle has only just been joined.

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
Remember his lyrical commentary on Objects in Space? I remember being a little surprised at how arid and cerebral his own vision of that lush and emotional story was. But that's the great thing about great art; the artist is just another viewer with an opinion, but the art transends all our reduction. By killing the Spiritual Father and destroying the Good Marriage he's gone a long way toward making over the Firefly universe into one that's more consistent with his existential pessimism.

Good point. And I go back to the scene on Haven when Mal explains his plan. None of the other people there know what war is like except Zoe. And she also has the most to lose from declaring war on the Alliance. Whereas Mal decided to not die after Serenity Valley Zoe chose to live and part of that was falling in love and marrying Wash. She knows that all of them could die and she still chooses to go along with the plan. It says something to me about her strength that she, of all the crew, makes a fully informed decision. And she also pays the highest price of any of the survivors.

JAIF

Friday, October 7, 2005 8:33 PM

"I seriously want to know why Book's death was not sufficient for this?"

In a word - timing. Also, Book's death was the spur for them to go to Miranda. Wash's death is a new event to make certain that we believe Joss can and will kill again.

"I don't rely upon the bare facts of the narrative for my emotional engagement. I rely on the believibility of the performances and writing for that."

If I'm reading that correctly, you don't really watch the show on film, you watch the one in your head. Is that what you're saying?

Anyways, I think you're side-stepping the point. Movies (and TV) are very formulaic. You don't kill a main character when it's in the middle, and in fact main characters rarely die period. Fight scenese are fun, not tense, because nobody's gonna die.

Now we have a film which puts a death in your face. Every injury is real now. Yes, it's important that Kaylee act believable when things go numb (or was it cold), and Simon rolling on the ground struggling to spit out the medicines he needs was well done. But die? I wouldn't have been worried at all if they hadn't killed Wash. At that point, all bets were off in my mind.

-Jeff

THANATUS

Friday, October 7, 2005 8:38 PM

I'm with HKC on this...If Wash absolutely had to die and it furthers the plot of future sequels, fine. I know I for one would have felt much better about it had the ship come to a rest and we see Wash impaled on the control yoke. Then we see the harpoons coming through the cabin and Mal and Zoe have to skin out. Fine. That would have been less distracting....dying with his boots on as it were. Dying mid sentence while he's being snarky...not so much. I think most of us are really arguing style over substance here. I remember at the end when they were burying their dead, I was thinking "two more movies in the (hoped for trilogy)...there's still a lot of room on that mesa, but I'm sure Joss can fill it in the end." Not the final thought this die-hard Firefly fan had hoped for.

HKCAVALIER

Friday, October 7, 2005 8:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jaif:
"I don't rely upon the bare facts of the narrative for my emotional engagement. I rely on the believibility of the performances and writing for that."

If I'm reading that correctly, you don't really watch the show on film, you watch the one in your head. Is that what you're saying?

I sure wish there was a rudeness nob on my computer so I could turn down the helacious attitude people are flinging around here. Please, emotional believibility is what makes any story compelling to watch. If you don't believe a character or a situation, it doesn't matter much to you, does it?

Quote:
Anyways, I think you're side-stepping the point. Movies (and TV) are very formulaic. You don't kill a main character when it's in the middle, and in fact main characters rarely die period. Fight scenese are fun, not tense, because nobody's gonna die.

You speak as exactly the jaded genra afficionado I believe Joss aimed that scene at. But Firefly was far more realistic to me than any old t.v. show. Whatever formulaic quality an individual episode took on worked for me in that "all cliches are true" sort of way--'cept maybe the death of the prostitute Mal slept with; 'course she had to die...blah, blah, blah. Firefly didn't need this kind of manipulative plot device, and neither does Serenity.

Quote:
Now we have a film which puts a death in your face. Every injury is real now. Yes, it's important that Kaylee act believable when things go numb (or was it cold), and Simon rolling on the ground struggling to spit out the medicines he needs was well done. But die? I wouldn't have been worried at all if they hadn't killed Wash. At that point, all bets were off in my mind.

See, that's where manipulative plot devices fail, because for me, the fact that Wash died, told the jaded part of my brain that no way were any of the rest of the cast gonna die after that--where the hell would the franchise be then?

When you purposefully manipulate your audience in such a gross manner, half your audience buys it and half your audience resents you for it.

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.

JAIF

Friday, October 7, 2005 9:15 PM

Quote:
I sure wish there was a rudeness nob on my computer so I could turn down the helacious attitude people are flinging around here. Please, emotional believibility is what makes any story compelling to watch. If you don't believe a character or a situation, it doesn't matter much to you, does it?

That wasn't intended as rude on my part - I'm at work, so I'm trying to parse something that I didn't get, and trying to do so while flipping back and forth to server terminals.

Anyways, I have the same attitude about someone who says the bare facts aren't important. I think that's one of the things that's wrong with TV - a lack of consistancy because people think reality's overrated. I have no problem with suspending disbelief at some points (you can't enjoy scifi at some point if you don't suspend disbelief), but I like big things shown clearly in my face so I get it as well. It's nice to hint that characters may die, but that's old. It's fine to show book's death from the alliance, but that didn't make me for a second believe one of them was going to die to reavers. They've escaped reavers and their traps before, and they'll do it again, at least until I'm proven otherwise.

--- firefly spoiler coming ----

Btw, that's why Jayne's overt betrayel in Ariel is so big for me. I see it, it's a real thing, and now I can't trust his character. I can't just trust that they're a good family - all that hinting they do about Jayne is really, really real.

-Jeff

P.S. No, Jaynestown wasn't enough. That was "before".

THANATUS

Friday, October 7, 2005 9:38 PM

Hey all...little tangential here, but I'm new to these boards (PS-Post Serenity). Curious, though...did this level of acrimony, in-fighting, and outright contempt for one another and their opinions exist here prior to Serenity? If not, does that tell anyone else something about Joss' success/lack thereof here? Dunno, maybe it's just me...but to see this (assumed) shift in an otherwise solid fanbase seems it should raise some eyebrows somewhere.

LUPINADDAMS

Friday, October 7, 2005 9:49 PM

Just back from my first BDM showing - and there will be more - and I'm finding this thread interesting. I'm tending to agree witgh those who found wash's death worked well in context, heightening tension (my partner and i were so thrown by the suddenness of wash's death that we really were in fear for *everyone* from then on).
One thing - OK two things - I've noted as conspicuous by their absence in the discussion:

1) Compare and contrast Wash's demise with that of Trinity in Matrix Revolutions. Superficially similar, miles apart in impact. Plus Wash gave no dumb parting speech uttered after major thoracic trauma...

2) Were there not whispers before the BDM came out that certain of the cast were more reluctant to return, and that maybe Alan Tudyk actually asked for an out? Anyone asked Joss this?

"You are what you do."
Andrew Vacchs

RIGHTEOUS9

Friday, October 7, 2005 9:56 PM

I really hope they aren't boycotting a story because it was told the way the author felt it should be. I really don't think that does the characters of Wash and Book justice, and I don't think the actors of those parts we fell in love with would be pleased.

I posted what I thought of Wash's death on another thread, but I can't find that thread, so I'll post it again, thinking through it a second time.

Even the people who loved how this story has played out, are accepting that Wash's death was random and just there because death happens, and because it generated a great deal of 'all bets are off' danger. I agree that it did that.

I don't agree that this was just an effort to tug at our heart strings, or to shock the crap out of us, or even just to keep it real.

I think it was an effort to be emotionally honest, as much as literally.

What I mean is that doing the right thing is not oft rewarded -- it is not something you do because you're going to get a prize at the other end, or because if you do it you win the race. If that were the case, such a choice would be easy.

To end this story happily instead of bittersweetly, would have cheapened the choices these characters made. Wash didn't die for nothing. He died for a reason. He died for a cause that every single one of these characters signed on for.

Achieving a 'serenity' of spirit, a calmness at the other side of the storm, is not a journey taken without sacrifice.

Our bdh's made that sacrifice. Two lost their lives for it. The others, their loved ones. But in their choices, they transcended the powerful constraints of survivalism, and became heroes.

In that same way, I think we have to be willing to sacrifice these characters for the greater integrity of their story. Joss was able to do that, and I commend him for it.

No one wants to let go of these people. No one wants to accept that there will be no new stories of Wash and Book.

But I'll take it over a cheap pay-off. Some sacrifices are worth making, but make no mistake, they are sacrifices. Doing the right thing sucks in so many ways.

FRUNK

Friday, October 7, 2005 10:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
When you purposefully manipulate your audience in such a gross manner, half your audience buys it and half your audience resents you for it.

It all comes down to what people feel is manipulative, what isn't and why they watch. Everything that happens in any type of entertainment is manipulative to one extent or another. What you call grossly manipulative I consider a surprising turn for the characters.

For me the litmus test for character driven shows like Firefly and Serenity is the believability and entertainment value of the characters. They don't have to be universally consistent, but I expect them to react and behave like whatever their persona would dictate. The plots are going to be goofy, but I don't care. I want to see Mal and crew's reactions to the impossible situations they are in. In that light I had no problem with Serenity's body count.

For me the point is not that Wash and Book died, death happens and is a perfectly reasonable event in the context it was presented. Everything that happens in a script is at the convenience of the script writer. The key is how do the characters react to that death. For the most part I thought it was handled excellently. I feel the tension increase not because I'm worried someone else is going to die (I've seen it twice I know they aren't), but because I believe the characters are worried someone else is going to die. In that light I don't care how manipulative the characters' environment is, as long as they remain entertaining and fun to watch.

I didn't think it was perfect. I thought the biggest false note related to Wash's death was Zoe's suicide dash into the Reavers. I'm not sure if it was the execution or the idea but it felt weak and forced. Still, it's just a moment in an otherwise excellent series of moments.

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
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.

Sweet avatar and quote. Buckaroooo!

STAKETHELURK

Friday, October 7, 2005 10:23 PM

One other thing to think about when it comes to Wash’s death is the metaphor. Whedon loves metaphors and often has several running at once in everything he does. In Serenity, “the Signal” is something of a metaphor for the series itself and the story it was supposed to tell. In fact, the whole life story of the series is played out in the movie. Wash has often been seen as a Whedon surrogate, similar to Xander in “Buffy.” Thus, after the most difficult piloting just of his life (fighting to tell the story you want despite network interference) and in the moment when everything seemed to be working out, Wash (Whedon) gets a giant spike rammed through his chest (which is probably what the cancellation felt like). That’s why it’s sudden and cruel, because the cancellation was the same thing. Whedon’s surrogate is then transferred to Mal (hardened with grief but determined to finish the job), who despite the death of Wash (who has now become the lost series) is still going to transmit the signal (tell the story). But Wash’s death shows that even if the signal gets out (the story, Serenity, gets told), something has been lost in the process (the movie is not the series and can’t ever be the series). It’s the tragedy and triumph of “Firefly” played out for us again, which may explain some of the strong emotions people have experienced--we’re reliving the cancellation with the death of Wash.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT PAGE