Discussion for the subject: What happened to my show, 'cause Serenity wasn't it?!
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 03:51
VIEWED: 33215
PAGE 10 of 11
Quote:
Originally posted by 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.
And where do we Firefly fans go from here? Just curious what you think.
Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.net
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Howdy. Let me first say that I'm totally new here. Tonight is the first time I've ever been here. I came because I love the show and the movie as well but was very aware of how different they were and was curious to see what other fans thought. I see that I've come to the right place.
I have really enjoyed this discussion even though it has gotten a little ugly. It's been informative and well thought out... and a little emotional. At least the emotions are because everyone cares so much. That's a great thing.
That being said, I'll get into my two cents on things. I think I'm in a position that is a little out of the norm for what you find here. I had never seen Firefly until two months ago. The ower of my local comic book store loaned me his DVD set of the series and I was hooked in the first ten minutes in a way that I never have been hooked before. I've never watched Buffy so Firefly was my introduction to Joss Whedon. Anyway, I was immediately struck by how amazingly good the show was: great concept, great characters, great dialogue, great stories, on and on and on. I had time to watch the series once, buy my own copy, watch them a second time, then loan the set to a friend (can't stop the signal, right?) and wait two weeks for the film to open. I think that puts me out of the norm because 1) I wasn't new to the world of Serenity for the movie, but 2) I haven't been waiting three years for the movie either.
So to me the series and the movie are much closer together as an overall experience. That being said I think they mesh together flawlessly. Are they different? You bet. Does that mean they don't fit together? Absolutely not.
I lot of what I've read in this thread, although well thought out and reasoned - and truthfully heartfelt - sounds like expectations borne of having to wait three years. In that time it is almost impossible for a brain to NOT come up with ideas about what you want/hope for something to be. And any expectations at all will have an immediate effect on a person's opinion of something. I'm sure this is something that we all are rather familiar with at this point. Star Wars to point out the most obvious example. There are plenty of others. I think that that is an unfortunate thing though and luckily I was spared that.
Some of those expectations however have lead to some harsh critisims. I am not opposed to critisism, but I also think that the delivery of such critisisms is important. Semantics? Yes. I know a lot of people hate semantics, but they're a real and important part of human communication, however subjective they are. I believe that no one should ever be above constructive critism but at the same time I'm not a fan of back seat drivers. And that's really tough because these two things contradict themselves. I have had a lot of mixed emotions reading these posts. At some points I wanted to tell people to put their money where their mouths were - if you don't think the film was done well, then show us something better. But then again I think the suggestion that critisism is important is not wrong. Lord knows that George Lucas desparately needed this while doing the new Star Wars trilogy (and I'm saying this as one of the few that was actually able to enjoy the new stuff). I don't necessarily think that Joss is in that same cocoon as Lucas, but I don't know; maybe he is. The skill with which he executed this movie to me speaks otherwise, but who knows - FOX's tampering making the series better may show evidence otherwise. Either way, that's information I don't know, so...
So long as the critisisms are respectful of the talent and effort that went into the creation, it's not a bad thing. It's food for thought; stuff that can be heard and then taken or discarded. And respect for the talent doesn't make anyone a blind follower. Those comments were made out of an emotional response and I'm sure that the person who made the comments knows that.
Anyway...
I have seen it twice now and will see it at least once or twice more. I agree with the sentiment that it gets better w
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Wow, welcome Mike! Thanks for the unique perspective- I totally agree, It's all one story- but you said it best!
Originally posted by iamaleafonthewind:
I see this whole thing as one big story and I love it through and though. I myself eagerly await whatever comes next for Mal and crew.
Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hey all,
Some thoughts on the movie's flaws. Running long.
* Killing two characters was a good tactical move for Joss, because this is expected to go one of two ways: A) there are no sequels and we're done here, so he might as well go for broke, or 2) there IS a sequel, and now he has a smaller and more manageable cast to squeeze into a two-hour ride. (Not sayin' I LIKE the deaths, just that it leaves Joss in a good position either way.)
* If this movie fails with first-timers, it will be because, with the oversized cast, there were not enough true character moments. By which I mean, Wash and Book died. How much had Joss given us to make us care about these two by this point? Wash made fun of Jayne getting beaten by a 90-pound girl. What else? Yeah, he flew the ship, but why would a first-timer LIKE him all that much, so as to be as stunned as us old-timers were when he got spiked?
And Inara ... The wave comes through, and we're told she and Mal have a history, and we need to have the whole crew sittin' on the bridge telling us what this interaction is supposed to mean. Just as we need the Op to tell us how deep and moving is Simon's love for River. How much better were those Simon/River moments in the series, when they'd DO something, or he'd look at her, and you'd be touched by how much he loves her without having to think, "Oh, yeah, there's that love the creepy badguy warned us to watch out for."
Nine's a lot of people to fall in love with in the ninety minutes before we have to worry that they all might die.
* To that point, I say that with all the action, and great action it was, there weren't enough quiet and family scenes. The sittin'-round-the-dinner-table stuff. Wash and Zoe in each other's arms around the campfire (because when Gina Torres smiles, you feel it in your toes).
* I see Simon's rescue of River as a rewrite. It's not quite the Simon we knew, and not quite the rescue he described. The No Prize solution is that he was disingenuous in the show and didn't tell the crew how directly he participated in River's rescue. For some reason. But I say, "This ain't Firefly" is right. Joss retconned a bit for dramatic and expositional needs. I can live with that.
* I missed Jayne's stupidity. He was not as comical a character in the BDM as he was on the show.
* I think that the up-front exposition could've been dispensed with (was that HK's idea, above?) but if needed, an opening crawl or voice-over about Earth That Was would've sufficed, and felt less forced than entire scenes of exposition, which really serve to remind the newcomers that they're a step behind on something that the rest of us are all insidery about.
* While I think it was a good choice for the film to just provide the answer -- River's psychic -- I liked the Firefly approach where she SEEMED psychic, especially from the viewers', rather than crew's, perspective, much better.
* Slightly off-topic, but: I can see how the Firefly theme song didn't belong in the movie, but how could it NOT be on the soundtrack? I checked the track listing, so now I'll have to pay attention to the music in the film to see whether I like it enough to buy. But the show theme would've sold it to me instantly. Silly, silly Joss.
Anecdote: I just got back from a vacation, so saw the movie for the first time this weekend. With a friend. Who suggested seeing it with me himself, even though for two years I have not been able to get him to watch the DVD because he saw one broadcast ep of Firefly and didn't get it (he HATED Buffy for similar reasons, but eventually his wife got hooked, and then they BOTH worked through my full DVD set. So he's just slow). Why'd he want to go see the BDM? 80% on Rotten Tomatoes is why.
But now that he's seen it, what did he say? Yeah, pretty good. But he's not in love with it. Didn't ask to borrow my DVDs now, either. And I think that's because the movie didn't do enough to establish the characters for newcomers. Yes, Mal has a journey, but the show took quiet moment
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I considered taking a chunk of time out of my to post a more poetic response than the one that is about to follow. But in the end, I realized that many have said what I want to say and that I have a lot of work to do today.
So...
My one observation that sums up my feelings is as follows:
I was a bit thrown off by the opening scene, as were a number of fans. Then we see the Firefly and hear the opening theme of the film. It was not the theme from the show. I realized from that point on that the pacing was going to be different, the characters would not be treated equally, the story was going to be more focused, etc.
This was not a bad thing, in my opinion (Something important to remember, these are opinions). This was a grander story than the show was ever forced to tell, and it was done in two hours. These things require a different set of rules and produce a different finished product.
Once I understood this, I loved the film.
I have more points on the subject, but don't feel they will add much to the conversation. Unless they are called for, I think I will leave them to myself.
Ave
-I don't care 'cause I'm still free.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Interesting thoughts Spike. I think most of us are aware, however, that Joss was in a really tricky place with this movie. He's got to make it work for newcomers while not making it a complete repeat for all the established fans. That would be an incredibly difficult task for anyone. The movie starts with a half finished story, so he's got to make sure it's a continuation and yet make it feel like it's starting from the beginning at the same time. I wouldn't want to face that challenge. I would be banging my head against the wall trying to figure it out. That being said, even though most fans seem to be annoyed by the beginning of the film, I liked it a lot. He knows he's gonna have to do some exposition and rehash so he decided to just get it out of the way right at the beginning so we can all move on with the story.
And knowing that that was what he was gonna do, he decided to be as creative about it as possible. HKCAVALIER complained about bad storytelling in an earlier post, so this is a good time to show an example of fantastic storytelling: the beginning of the film. It starts with the voice over which becomes the voice of River's teacher. That's nice transition #1. Then River talks about meddling (a little moment that I liked a lot) and the teacher comes up and, quite unexpectedly, stabs her in the head with her pencil (or whatever that was), which segues right into the scene of River in the hands of the allience. Nice transition #2. Then we have that scene stop in it's tracks to become the Operator looking over the materials so that he's familiar with his prey. Nice transition #3. He ends his scene by asking the projection of River where she is. That segues right to... well, the opening titles, which morphs into the symbol on the side of the ship. The camera pulls around and we venture all the way through the ship, ending up on River. That is not only nice transition #4 but also a great bit of writing - he shows us the answer to the Operator's question. River is in the cargo bay of Serenity. That's great craft right there. And it shows that even when it comes to simple (and possibly repetitive) exposition he still gives it his all.
Sure I was familiar with most of this as a fan of the show, but I was immediately hooked in by the great storytelling to start off the film. I know that he's stuck with this task of being new and yet a continuation at the same time, so at least he made sure that the recap was interesting and well executed. And really, what more could you ask?
Could there have been more quiet moments? Sure. And I agree that they would have been really nice, but this is a story with a lot to tell. Someone mentioned earlier that this is a plot driven story rather than a character driven story and I agree. So knowing that, when it comes to issues of running time in the film, everything has to be sacrificed for plot. Maybe it makes for less than an ideal film in a lot of fans minds, but remember, the show was cancelled and THEN Universal was nice enough to give Joss the money to actually continue the story! If Universal's only requirement was that the running time had to come in under two hours, then that's a real blessing. Joss showed himself to be very flexible with the people at Foxx. Universal was nice enough to not only give him the money but to leave him alone as well, so if Joss had to lose some nice quiet moments in order to grant Universal their one and only request, then so be it. A Firefly movie missing some quiet moments is still a world better than no Firefly movie at all in my opinion.
It's easy for viewer to look at a story and critic it from an ideal place, but that's not reality. In reality making a film is a business. There are budget constraints, time constraints (both in running time of a film and in production time limitations), production constraints (as in someone else gave you the money to make the film, so you have to be willing to work with others and be flexible), etc...
I think that knowing the realities that he was faced with, including the whole fan/new people
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
HKCavalier: A character driven story is very different, primarily on an emotional level. Compelling characters bring us into the story on their terms. We’re not watching “a gun fight” we’re watching the Alliance mole panic and shoot Kaylee in the gut. We’re not thinking, “Youch, that musta hurt!” so much as we’re thinking, “Simon wouldn’t really let Kaylee die, he’s bluffing!”...(five pages deleted)
Just came across this quote from Joss that seems relevant to the whole discussion of character-driven, plot-driven....
From an Edinburgh interview at
http://www.channel4.com/film/reviews/feature.jsp?id=149341&page=1
"Through all the restructuring, it ended up being quite different from the original show," says Whedon. "It became more about taking these tiny people in this tiny ship who meant nothing and weren't a part of history, putting them in the most epic situation I could and seeing if they folded under the pressure."
~ Scootch over, Wash! ~
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by FinnMcKool:
We never had a "dinner table", "Uncle Natty story-telling," faux basketball game moment. And really the only spot we could have, because after which and even a bit before everyone was so tense about the Simon/River/Mal fight, was on Haven around the campfire, with Jayne playing guitar of all things. That could have been a good "Hey we're all a family here" moment, which is what the show was missing.
Umm. And notice, amost before it's even begun, Joss moves from that family campfire moment out to Mal and Book conversing privately.
(Not sure if we're still policing spoilers on this thread, but here goes.)
Select to view spoiler:
This scene emphasises the loneliness and alienation Mal is feeling due to his conflicting responsibilities (for his ship and crew in general, towards River in particular), and the slight distancing of Book from his former crewmates.
Notice also, that Book is still trying to distance himself from his mysterious past -- but it's not that past that eventually kills him. It's the more recent past he shares with the crew. The past he wouldn't disown if he could.
Book chose to walk towards the good, and it is because of this that his past, in the form of the Operative, comes to take him.
Y'all gotta admit, Joss is damn good at multi-layered storytelling.
"If you can't do something smart, do something right." -- Shepherd Deria Book
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Two thoughts or things I noticed.
I think that maybe Book's past was that of an operative. They don't ever say his name. He tends to know more than anyone rightfully should. Lot's of things that make sense with this, if you manage to look.
Secondly at the end, after it all Mal asks Zoe if the ship is going to make it. She replies that she's shaky, but she'll pull through. Something to that effect at least. I believe more than the ship, that they are talking about her, Zoe. These are the quiet moments to me, not exactly the quiet moments we are used to, but one that we can appreciate.
At my second viewing, I managed to see more of the crew that I loved. Maybe because I knew what was coming and could pay more attention to details.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I have a different take on the movie. I thought it had much more explication than the series. There was more 'backstory', more explanatory dialogue, more commentary by the characters. I took this as an effort to bring non-fans into the Firefly 'verse and get them up to speed within the span of one short film. I didn't find it particularly geared toward fandom, I thought it went more the other way.
It was also more epic and less intimate, which happens in movies - bigger screen, bigger effects, bigger themes.
And many things get neatly wrapped-up in the end, unlike the series which left loose ends hanging all over the place.
Most of this I put to the fact that it is a movie rather than a series, and of necessity it has a different format.
It was not, from my perspective, as satisfying as the series, but I know I'm a sucker for the unexplained and unexplored, so that is just my personal gotcha.
All in all, though, it was a satisfying movie, which has to explain, move, and wrap up its story quickly.
Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME