The Movie Sucked

POSTED BY: adlai
UPDATED: Monday, January 9, 2006 06:36
VIEWED: 17848
PAGE 2 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

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.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE