Star Wars III vs. Serenity
POSTED BY: deepgirl187
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 5, 2006 14:22
VIEWED: 10684
PAGE 4 of 4
I have been a star wars fan for quite a while to be precise i have watched starwars and other starwars related things scince before grade school but even i, the die hard starwars fan that i am must say that serenity and firefly beat any tv show or movie that has yet to come on telivision. Though starwars is a very respectable movie and has a great cast and script it does not match up to Joss's stellar creation. The cast is very uniqe and potrey an enormus amount of diverse emotion, and Jewl Stait is one of the bestlookig person on the face of the earth.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I enjoyed the SW prequels (well, Ep. I not so much...).
I think it's a bit silly comparing Star Wars to Serenity - obviouse Han Solo influences aside. Especially in the case of the prequels. Just because they're both set in space, does not make them the same thing. Just as Solaris, 2001 and Event Horizon are all sci-fi "space" movies, but very different in style, tone, approach, ect.
Firefly/Serenity is more or less about "real" people living in space, dealing with the day-today affairs that come along. Star Wars is a imagined mythology dealing with character achetypes (as opposed to "real" people), who are mostly knights, royalty, or politicians.
It's like comparing "Silverado" to "Excalibur".
"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."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by aztechrome:
Wow, what a choice!
CAKE OR DEATH?
Isn't that the real question here?
I mean, even the public at large rejected the new Star Wars movies. These are the same people that make things like XXX-2 into moneymaking machines, and are probably going to go see "3 Fast, 3 Furious", or whatever the hell they're going to call it. A wag of the finger at Pixar too. The number of bad CG movies that they spit out should be considered a war-crime.
Why bother to compare "Sith" with a good movie?
I'll take cake, you can have as much death as you want.
Uh.... XXX-2 was a huge money-looser, not a money-making machine.
And sure, there are plenty of vocal detractor's of the SW prequels, but it's hardly "rejected" by the public at large when it's the highest-grossing film of the year, and (I think) the highest-selling DVD as well. If everyone hated it in the theatre, I doubt they'd rush out and buy the DVD.
And which crappy CGI movies has Pixar made? There have been plenty of bad GC flicks lately, but as far as I can tell, they're the non-Pixar ones. Unless you're just attributing every CG film to them, which is unfair.
"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."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
aztechrome braced me, thus:
Quote:
Uh, isn't all organic chemistry based upon groups composed out of those same elements?
Edit: ... along with carbon, obviously.
Counterintuitively,
-aztechrome
Yeah, sure, more or less. But not in the same order, separated by a total of five atoms in a complex molecule.
By way of contrast, examine my personal favorite poison: C2H5OH. See the difference?
In-toxic-atedly,
zoid
P.S.
From 'hero' we get 'heroism', defined as "heroic conduct especially as exhibited in fulfilling a high purpose or attaining a noble end". Following that reasoning then, the definition of 'heroinism' should be, "female heroic conduct... attaining a noble end", derived from the term 'heroine', right? Nope. 'Heroinism' is heroin addiction and related socially unacceptable behaviors. Ergo, a heroine exhibits heroism, even though it's distinctly masculine to do so; if she exhibits heroinism, she is no longer a heroine, because of the heroin. It's enought to make a heroine want to smoke crack.
Ain't it great to live in a male-dominated culture? Pass me another beer, aztec...
P.P.S.
Wouldn't that make a great t-shirt? "C2H5OH Me", or "Instant A$$hole: Just add C2H5OH". Fantastic, if you prefer to remain undisturbed by feminine companionship while at the pub.
_________________________________________________
"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Im deffo a Firefly / Serenity fan but i dont think you can compare the both. For me there different films all together.
"Love, you know all the math in the verse but if you take a boat in the air, you dont love she'll shake you up sure as turn of the worlds" Mal
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Okay, I'm fairly new to the 'Verse. Even before I became aware of our beloved characters on FF/Serenity, I was a fan of the "original" SW movies, especially when the special editions came out. The thing that really turned me off of the prequels is the onslaught of obnoxious characters that they included to make the movies geared more for small children. Jar-jar Binks, young Anakin, anyone? I hope I'm not alone being irritated by these characters. There are definately things that they could have left out.
But I do have to say that the third is the best of the Star Wars because it ties everything together, it's transitional.
However, NOTHING beats our BDM as far as the humor, the believability (is that a word?) of the characters.
Star Wars is good vs. evil. Serenity/Firefly shows us that even the good guys are in that grey area. That speaks volumes on the true human condition. It's just more relatable.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:Quote:
Originally posted by aztechrome:
CAKE OR DEATH?
Uh.... XXX-2 was a huge money-looser, not a money-making machine.
And sure, there are plenty of vocal detractor's of the SW prequels, but it's hardly "rejected" by the public at large when it's the highest-grossing film of the year, and (I think) the highest-selling DVD as well. If everyone hated it in the theatre, I doubt they'd rush out and buy the DVD.
And which crappy CGI movies has Pixar made? There have been plenty of bad GC flicks lately, but as far as I can tell, they're the non-Pixar ones. Unless you're just attributing every CG film to them, which is unfair.
My wasn't I feeling high and mighty last night. ;P
You're right on all counts about those films, of course.
I'd rephrase to say that the public reaction was rather tepid and moderately disappointed throughout the trilogy. It just worries me that people kept paying to see them.
Also, IMO, I think people will look back and compare the Rings trilogy with the new Star Wars. LOTR wasn't perfect, but if you asked me whether Peter Jackson or George Lucas made a better film.... well.
I'm more concerned about the investment of huge chunks of production money into films like XXX-2 or Electra, or Catwoman, or Stealth, and the upcoming 3 fast 3 furious. It makes me upset to see enough money for 4 good films to be wasted on Electra or Stealth. We used to have some room for flavor in our cinema. Now it's all too rare. (Serenity, Serenity, Serenity)
I guess Im done ranting.
I still say this is a cake or death question.
I'll have cake/Serenity please.
Thank you.
N
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by zoid:
aztechrome braced me, thus:Quote:
Uh, isn't all organic chemistry based upon groups composed out of those same elements?
Edit: ... along with carbon, obviously.
Counterintuitively,
-aztechrome
Yeah, sure, more or less. But not in the same order, separated by a total of five atoms in a complex molecule.
By way of contrast, examine my personal favorite poison: C2H5OH. See the difference?
In-toxic-atedly,
zoid
Ain't it great to live in a male-dominated culture? Pass me another beer, aztec...
P.P.S.
Wouldn't that make a great t-shirt? "C2H5OH Me", or "Instant A$$hole: Just add C2H5OH". Fantastic, if you prefer to remain undisturbed by feminine companionship while at the pub.
Zoid = Chaotic Evil Robot
Phew, Ok. That should raise the nerd level to the point where few will read this post.
First off, any guy with a chemical molecule on his T-shirt is guaranteed to remain unmolested by anything resembling a female if he's sitting in a pub.
I'd rather just wear my C21H30O2 shirt into a cafe in Holland. I'll just point and say, get me some of this and mix it into my hot coacoa. Then I'd watch all the boats. That's my idea of kicking back.
Of course if you like drooling on yourself you acetylize some opioids. You're definitely going to have a hard time asking for more (5α,6α)-7,8-didehydro-4,5-epoxy-
17-methylmorphinan-3,6-diol diacetate (ester). I guess Diacetylmorphine would be a little easier.
Personally, I'm going to grab a beer.
Solipsistically,
-aztechrome
PS: Does anyone in Firefly (Other than Simon), use pharms? People drink alot, but I notice that other things don't seem to be in the 'verse.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Zoid = Chaotic Evil Robot
Phew, Ok. That should raise the nerd level to the point where few will read this post.
First off, any guy with a chemical molecule on his T-shirt is guaranteed to remain unmolested by anything resembling a female if he's sitting in a pub.
I'd rather just wear my C21H30O2 shirt into a cafe in Holland. I'll just point and say, get me some of this and mix it into my hot coacoa. Then I'd watch all the boats. That's my idea of kicking back.
Of course if you like drooling on yourself you acetylize some opioids. You're definitely going to have a hard time asking for more (5α,6α)-7,8-didehydro-4,5-epoxy-
17-methylmorphinan-3,6-diol diacetate (ester). I guess Diacetylmorphine would be a little easier.
Personally, I'm going to grab a beer.
Solipsistically,
-aztechrome
PS: Does anyone in Firefly (Other than Simon), use pharms? People drink alot, but I notice that other things don't seem to be in the 'verse.
Well...I think drug usage is mentioned in passing via a throwaway line about "drops," presumably some sort of hallucinogen (like LSD) or something. But none of the BDMs use any drug stronger than caffeine.
And to ensure this entry covers the original topic...I liked both the prequels and Serenity, but for different reasons.
Revenge of the Sith did it's intended job...it was a throwback to Saturday afternoon serials of Lucas's youth where the acting and plot were secondary concerns behind the crazy FX and plot twists. It was about good vs. evil and campy characters. Only reason the Original Trilogy gained significance cuz it wan't all Lucas all the time in control and there was still some mystery to be had. No one exactly knew how Darth Vader got the suit or how the Empire got to power specifically. We could imagine those things. Prequels answered those questions but with a singular vision with a visuals-focused creator.
Serenity (and Firefly before it) was more about classical Western or suspense films. Darker, dangerous, emotionally charged with real-life issues. Joss doesn't need visuals to succeed. He can write stuff with minimalist set and props - just the actors working the magic (like Dogville or Glengarry Glen Ross) - and it works. Serenity succeeds cuz it goes for the meat rather than just the skin or packaging. We still want more (this site proves that in spades) and we'll keep dreaming up stuff to stucco the holes until we get another comic book or novel or something to act as a proper patch (Joss certified and all
).Comparisons seem rather apple-and-orange to me. Both George Lucas and Joss Whedon are borrowers. They just borrow in different ways from differnt sources.
BEB
Literature has shown us some of humanity's greatest achievements; history, some of our greatest failures -- Alun Lewis
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
BlueEyedBrigadier wrote, in part:
Quote:
...Comparisons seem rather apple-and-orange to me. Both George Lucas and Joss Whedon are borrowers. They just borrow in different ways from differnt sources.
"Apple-and-orange"... I'll buy that, but only to the extent that the ultimate measure of a film maker should be, "Is s/he an effective storyteller?"
Musicians are storytellers. Painters are storytellers. Dancers are storytellers.
Artists are storytellers.
Not all storytellers are artists, in much the same way that my 12-year old son is not Isaac Stern, even though he too plays the violin (tortures it, more like).
But does that mean that comparing my son's ability with a violin with Stern's ability is 'apples-and-oranges'? I don't think so. I can say that my son's ability is vastly inferior to Stern's, and that he will in all likelihood never attain Stern's artistry with the instrument.
"Apples-and-oranges' would be comparing my son's fiddle playing to Da Vinci's paintings (or little Susie's from down the street, for that matter).
Similarly, Joss and George work in the same medium. Saying they don't compare is copping out. One of these men is a superior storyteller -- a superior artist -- to the other one.
In an attempt to harmonize with the Lucas Apologists: I, too, was a die-hard Star Wars fan. I, too, went to each of the prequel episodes, hoping and praying that this movie would be the piece de resistance for the entire franchise, the saving grace, the glorious pinnacle of all things Star Wars.
Those hopes and prayers were never realized. No matter how hard I hoped, and tried to squint my eyes just right, Episode I -- followed by Ep II, then by Ep III -- deeply disappointed me. They were not proper stories, for all the reasons listed in the various posts above. I refuse to believe there's a rationale that suddenly transforms them into good storytelling. And I ain't buying that George is a 'visual storyteller', or that the themes of the two movies are so disparate that they cannot be compared. For example, I can (and do) maintain that "Serenity" and "The Matrix" are examples of great movies, great stories well-told. Likewise, the Matrix sequels and Star Wars prequels are examples of bad storytelling because they are similarly plagued by 'CGI-wonder', and because they are 'just going through the motions', engaging in self-imitation, ineffectively.
As a final gesture of compassion for the pain of my fellow "Star Wars" fans: Perhaps George is more comparable to Elvis Presley. During his early years as a performer, he was undoubtedly a great artist. In his waning years, however, Elvis 'lost his instrument', and with it his ability to touch his fans.
So, is George the 'Fat Elvis', today? Was he 'Young Elvis' back in the 70's when we first fell in love with his 'music', his 'voice'?
Remember: Many people loved Elvis so desperately that they worshipped his every utterance and gesture, even after he had long since become an object of utter derision to those who were not blinded by such devotion. Conversely, those who are tainted by the prequel trilogy's incompetent storytelling may forget -- or otherwise not realize -- that Lucas was once a great storyteller. That's what earned him the steadfast devotion of so many millions.
Tossing y'all a final apple (sans grenades, they cost extra): "American Graffiti" was a very good Lucas film. It launched the careers of Harrison Ford and Richard Dreyfuss, and breathed new life into Ron Howard's. But mostly it was a great story, with great characters. George Lucas was once the Joss Whedon of his day.
Respectfully,
zoid
P.S.
Lucas has been off-loading a lot of stories onto Steven Spielberg; but he's starting to look decidely thick around the middle, too, vis E.A. Presley.
_________________________________________________
"I aim to misbehave." -Capt. Mal Reynolds, Serenity, a.k.a. 'the BDBOF'
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME