I know everyone wants a new Firefly series, but...

POSTED BY: Seba
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 1, 2006 03:15
VIEWED: 14993
PAGE 1 of 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

SEBA

Saturday, February 25, 2006 8:40 PM

...honestly, how good can it be without Book or Wash? The entire character dynamic of the show is now ruined. The #1 reason the show was as fantastic as it was was because of the fascinating characters and the way they played off of one another. It was perfectly balanced, and now that balance is gone. Joss, from the Serenity commentary seems to act as if these decisions were of no consequence, but he has effectively killed the show himself this time, no network interference needed. It’s one thing to kill off a character after we’ve explored the character fully, from all angles after 8 or 9 seasons, but in this instance, we’ve really only just met Wash and Book – all of us – and to kill them at this stage is to suggest that their presence on the ship was meaningless, making the whole “family” theme ridiculous as well. After so many fans fought to have the show resurrected, to kill off two beloved main characters is nothing short of sadism from Mr. Whedon, and a complete slap in the face. He seems to think that the only reason people watch the show is to marvel in his creative brilliance, and anything he does will be applauded and rabidly consumed by his fan base, but in reality, it was the characters that drew people to his show, and actions such as this will surely put a dent in that fanbase. Myself, not being a fan of Mr. Whedon or his pre-Firefly work at all, was certainly not impressed by his decision.

Perhaps Firefly is better off dead and in the hands of caring fans than Mr. Whedon, who, judging by Serenity, has started to loose the original magic.

SEBA

Saturday, February 25, 2006 8:54 PM

Honestly, if he was going to kill someone, it should have been Inara. In the context of the film, it would have really sent Mal over the edge, and Book would have been much more valuable during the fighting and strategizing. Inara was barely in the film as it was, getting a few lines with absolutely no indication that she was even a prostitute to the general viewers, and having her in the final battle seemed more than rediculous to me -- she really did not need to be there. Just a thought.

MURKYMERC

Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Seba:
Honestly, if he was going to kill someone, it should have been Inara.

Okay, go sit in the corner and repeat out loud, "We do not kill off incredibly hot women" until you are give permission to rejoin the class. But first, could someone please hand me the paddle.

SEBA

Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:25 PM

Sorry, guess I'm just too fixated on interesting characters instead of breasts.

I'll repeat that I enjoy all the ensemble cast as a whole, but if I had to choose...

EMPXENU

Saturday, February 25, 2006 9:39 PM

You don't kill off one half of the best onscreen couple ever... without them even being a couple.

----
"I think, therefore I am... I think"

SEBA

Saturday, February 25, 2006 10:11 PM

Well we can kill off one half of the other best on-screen couple after only 16 hours of content, I think this would be perfectly feesible.

STORYMARK

Saturday, February 25, 2006 10:13 PM

Well, some people like things to evolve. Some prefer that they stay stagnant. Can't please everybody....

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NDRAGE85

Saturday, February 25, 2006 10:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Seba:
and having her in the final battle seemed more than rediculous to me -- she really did not need to be there. Just a thought.

what was she supposed to do? hide on the ship while the Reavers came? Great idea. Of course she had to be there.

and while I have a few issues with the deaths myself, I accept them and I think they are for the better. Shows and stories need to evolve. that can't happen if nothing ever changes. Yes, there is more that could have been told about them, but Joss didn't know if he'd ever get that chance. If they had lived there would be no feeling of consequence, no feeling of change, and no feeling of different future development. And while it took away two beloved characters, Joss created them and made us love them. Whose to say that if the story continues, he won't introduce us to new characters to love that will add a whole new depth to the stories and characters. They can never be replaced, but a lot more can be introduced. It keeps things more 3-dimensional. IMO.

GAMMARAYGIRL

Saturday, February 25, 2006 10:22 PM

Seems like there is room for a few episodes to happen chronologically before the movie. Just a thought.

TIVO25

Saturday, February 25, 2006 10:24 PM

The point of the killings were not so much to affect the characters as the audience, which is ultimately the main point of any movie or television series - to affect the audience (and make money, of course).

I remember quite literally thinking after Book died that "okay, he's killed off a character, this should mean that everyone else is safe now." And once Wash was killed, it seemed like everyone was fair game. If he could kill Wash, there wasn't anyone he couldn't kill. First Zoe, then the others all started taking hits. And finally Simon gets hit and he actually gets a "hollywood I'm going to die so I'd better say my goodbyes" scene, which gives River the impetus needed to attack the Reavers.

And I hated it, I was very angry with Wash's death, but it truly made the movie that much better. And yes, I was bitter, but once I came to terms with it, I had to admire the balls needed to take such a risk. To risk completely alienating such a loyal fan base to tell the story HE wanted to tell, took some guts.

And there was no reason to kill Inara. The Operative certainly had none, surely he knew enough of Mal to know that killing her would not have helped him get River back, rather the opposite. It would have been the worst thing he could have done. And having Inara killed by Reavers would have accomplished little other than racking Mal with guilt at letting her get killed. A great avenue to explore, yes, but it does little for the story. At that point, Mal needs to believe with all his heart. Inara's death would've shaken that resolve, to the point where the audience wouldn't find credibility in his determination.

By leaving Inara alive, he kept that story-line open for future episodes/movies, and now we have an incredible story-line for Zoe, who, to be quite honest, seemed to me to have the least dynamic character growth in the series.

Of all the characters, hers seemed to have the least room for growth and change (aside from her desire to have a kid) and this death really gives the character a place to visit emotionally and mentally now. It wouldn't surprise me if killing Wash was what Joss originally intended to do from the very beginning (remember Doyle, Angel fans?).

There's also the possiblity of exploring River's survivor guilt. If they hadn't helped her, Wash and Book would both still be alive (probably).

So I'm not worrying too much. Yes, Wash was fantastic, I loved his character and he provided great humor for the show. But I really think his death opened up a wealth of potential storylines, and am willing to give Joss the benefit of the doubt that if he created this wonderful mix of characters once, he can do it again.

Edit:

Quote:
Originally posted by ndrage85:
Pretty much what I wanted to say, only better.

Curse you and your not-so-long-windedness for saying what I was trying to say in a much faster and more concise manner.

1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE