Why was Firefly cancelled?

POSTED BY: dragunzng
UPDATED: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 04:12
VIEWED: 6215
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE

DRAGUNZNG

Tuesday, September 23, 2003 7:37 PM

And I don't want "Because FOX is stupid". What were the reasons? Spiralling production costs? Bad ratings? bad time slot? Why?

Jayne-Why'd y'all order a deadguy?

SERGEANTX

Tuesday, September 23, 2003 9:46 PM

Oh, thanks for the post. Hey, I have a paper cut. Would you like to pour some lemon juice on it?

Seriously though, we feel your pain. The topic's been beaten to death here. Not to discourage further conversation, but you might be interested in some of these articles and archived posts.

http://www.keithmpire.com/firefly/index.html

http://www.fireflyfans.net/feature.asp?f=39

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=1161

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=1273

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=2&t=1318

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

MANIACNUMBERONE

Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:07 PM

Dang Sarge, you got some great links there. My favorite part of the second link you provide:

Quote:
Malcolm Reynolds lived by a rule of honor that demands justice. He was in this respect quintessentially American—and, to be more specific about it, quintessentially Southern American.

And that, my friends, may really have been a problem for Firefly. The conscious patterning of the Firefly milieu on the Confederate defeat that Whedon publicly stated was the case may have not set very well in the Yankee-dominated halls of Political Correctness that rules modern America, be they "liberal" or "conservative" - Hank Parnell

-------------------------------------------
Inara: Who's winning?
Simon: I can't really tell, they don't seem to be playing by any civilized rules that I know.
-------------------------------------------

DRAGUNZNG

Wednesday, September 24, 2003 12:20 AM

Thanks Sarge, didn't mean to bring up any bad memories :) I just discovered FF and was truly curious as to what the behind the scenes reasons were. Your links were very helpful. I'm finding new recruits every day!

DRAKON

Wednesday, September 24, 2003 8:38 AM

Bad time slot, expense, and constant schedule interference with Baseball. Science fiction is possibly the most expensive type of show to do, even with modern CGI and a small special effects budget, all the props are "one of a kind" instead of off the shelf.

9 characters are expensive as well, location shooting, especially doing rustic in LA, (or anywhere in CA these days, why do you think Stargate is filmed up in Canada?)

One point about CGI, while almost anyone can get ahold of a decent graphics program and play around with it, finding an artist who can make it look real and cool at the same time is a bit tough. Having produced some real crappy stuff, (which will never see the light of day) in Lightwave, I know just enough about that side of things to make me dangerous.

The computers and the software are getting cheaper. The artists are not quite there yet, and may never be, to make it cheap enough to compete with more reality type dramas (cop and lawyer shows, etc.)

Faux was stupid in cancelling it. But they do what everyone does, look at the ratings versus cost. Ad revenues, how the network makes money is based on "bums in the seats" and by putting it up against baseball on Friday nights, they could not get the ratings to justify the expense. They cut their losses way to early.

The movie might be a good way to revive it however. A lot of stock footage can be created and used in the movie, along with props and sets that do not have to be rebuilt for a television show. All that can be recycled for a new series, just like they did in Star Trek, TNG.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

ZEKE023

Friday, October 24, 2003 6:14 PM

Quote:

Malcolm Reynolds lived by a rule of honor that demands justice. He was in this respect quintessentially American—and, to be more specific about it, quintessentially Southern American.

And that, my friends, may really have been a problem for Firefly. The conscious patterning of the Firefly milieu on the Confederate defeat that Whedon publicly stated was the case may have not set very well in the Yankee-dominated halls of Political Correctness that rules modern America, be they "liberal" or "conservative" - Hank Parnell

I'm in such an antagonistic mood today - sorry about that in advance.

Whereas Firefly's similarity to the southern confederacy is true, I don't think it had anything to do with Firefly's cancelation.
Now, I myself hold no bias against southerners - but I know those who do... and...

I don't think I've ever heard a Northerner state: "I would never want to live south of the Mason/Dixon Line! Those Southerners all live lives by a rule of honor that demands justice!"

mostly I hear:
"I would never want to live south of the Mason/Dixon Line! Those southerners are all uneducated racist rednecks who still hang confederate flags in rebellion to their own country! The confederacy is dead! There is no such thing as 'THE SOUTH' and it will never rise again - get the fuck over it and stop lynching blacks and gays you narrow-minded prejudice assholes!"

Now that obviously is not a blanket statement of people in the south - but prejudiced norhterners are no more wise than any other prejudiced people and have irrational biases and biggotry. This is but an example.

But let's be serious. Mal or any of Serenity's crew don't hold any of the qualities that Northerner's dislike Southerner's for. If anything they possess the qualities of "underdog heroes" ... and that's not how Northerners think of the South.

I think yea'old average Northern TV watcher mostly thinks: "Yeay slavery is over... thank God the South lost. I guess I could have paid attention in school more so that I would know that slavery didn't have much to do with the civil war... wait... Where's my beer?"

It's a good theory. I think it doesn't hold any water at all.

PEDME84

Saturday, October 25, 2003 12:53 AM

i tend to believe that these things always come down to the writing and the basic entertainment value of the plot (you can call me naive). but i think firefly's simple problem was that the plot did not move itself along fast enough. a non jossy-loving, educatedly faithful audience member won't know that if you're patient it gets really f*ing cool around ep 14. to those people that's not story structure, that's months of their lives. almost every episode kind of has to be do or die in order to hook your audience and get those ratings that get the advertisers that pay the network that then decides to not cancel the show.

- emily

SERGEANTX

Saturday, October 25, 2003 3:38 AM

Huh,

I'd barely even heard of Joss Whedon when I sat down to watch Train Job and I was hooked right from the start. It's true that the really subtle depths of Firefly take time to appreciate (an hour a week by the way, which adds up to about half a day for the whole run) but regardless, I'll hold even the weakest stand alone Firefly episodes up against ninety-five percent of what people spend their TV-watching-time on.

I have to admit I really don't know why Firefly didn't make it, except that sometimes things just don't work out like we think they should... and that sucks.

SergeantX

"..and here's to all the dreamers, may our open hearts find rest." -- Nanci Griffith

SGTRAUKSAUFF

Monday, December 29, 2003 6:14 PM

Here's my take:

The reason that Firefly was cancelled is very similar to the reasons why Farscape was cancelled. Both amazing shows, both the best thing since sliced bread. Both with great vision and continuity to the story.

Your every-day viewer is not interested in a great science fiction story that subtly develops characters and shows amazing interaction between them. They are interested in letting their brain go on standby, a half-hour (or hour) at a time. It's the same reason why it seems that there are few people who actually read books to enjoy the stories.
It's the way society is becoming: I want it all, I want it now, I don't want to wait.

The show was just too good. People have forgotten how to use their imagination. They want to be shown everything, given everything, with no effort expended. Whoa... watch a TV show that makes you think afterwards? Perish the thought! No No, you SHOULD watch the show that is societally accepted as being the cool show, the show to watch. You MUST find out who is getting kicked off the island next, you NEED to find out if the next round of contestants can break the 32,000 dollar question, you have absolutely GOT to see that one guy steal a bicycle and evade police capture until the seat fell off when he got run over by the bus....

Networks don't want people to want substance. Networks want people to watch the filler in between their ads. bottom line. It's a 2-part problem. the networks won't change, they're making big bucks. The people won't change, they've been tricked into not caring anymore.

just my two bitter cents.

--sarge

The only way to comprehend what mathematicians mean by Infinity is to contemplate the extent of human stupidity.

(I saw that quote somewhere on this site today, and it is SO true...)

HERO

Monday, December 29, 2003 6:54 PM

Because FOX is stupid...

Actually its because of a flawed network policy.

FOX wants instant ratings, instant results, thus goes for high shock value and invests in reactionary entertainment designed to capitalize on successful themes discovered by other networks.

Another apporach is that taken by FOX rival The WB. They invested in quality programming, not just money but time. Shows like Gilmore Girls and 7th Heaven, now ratings staples, started off with seasons of high quality, poorly rated shows. This 'if you build it they will come' eventually drew audiences that allowed The WB to expand its programming to additional nights, again with quailty programming and the patience to allow a show and thus the network to succeed or fail on its merits rather then initial ratings. Thus WB, once the "Frog" or network programming has developed into a real alternative for America's mainstream television audience.

Please note this is a failing of FOX Network. FoxSports, FoxNews, FX and other Fox divisions seem to approach things in an entirely different manner. Almost seems as though Fox as rounded up its least capable people (who they are stuck with for one reason or another) and placed them all at the Network.

Makes me wonder what would happen if somebody slipped a copy of the Serenity or that kick ass trailer posted here to the President of Fox. He (or she) clearly knows good programming, even if the Network does not.

H

1 2 NEXT PAGE