My theory about guns in Firefly
POSTED BY: Ringwraith
UPDATED: Thursday, January 2, 2003 01:21
VIEWED: 41138
PAGE 4 of 15
Hi haplo721.
(I just delete the duplicate post, that's all you can do I guess 
)
Quote:
Originally posted by Haplo721:
I don't really see how using firearms on a spaceship would be that risky. Certainly a vessel constructed for the rigors of space travel would have a thick enough hull to take a .45 without rupturing!
I meant firing inside a spaceship. If I shot someone with a .45 in the Serenity, it'd blow their head of and the bullet would probably richochet around the hull and knock my head off too. If not, you can bet it would do some pretty awfull damage to something!
SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:He's not Steven Spielberg making "Minority Report." This is television. There's a limit to what he can afford. Plus, the "firearms stuff" is part of a western motif. Did you get that there was a motif?
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
I personally believe that the use of projectile weapons (in case you hadn't guessed :) ) is a flawed one and that it's only our love for the venerable Mr Whedon that makes us want to defend his judgment.
I'm quite prepared to forgive the dude, if only for the silent Serenity in space. I think that takes nerve - the firearms stuff is just a cheap trick to spend less money!
--- Joe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
He's not Steven Spielberg making "Minority Report." This is television. There's a limit to what he can afford.
Wow! I hadn't thought of that!Quote:
Originally posted by mojoeca:
Plus, the "firearms stuff" is part of a western motif. Did you get that there was a motif?
Hehe. Yep, I guess I got the root'n toot'n motif. It's the silly idea to put six-shooters and pump action rifles in a sci fi show set 500 years in the future that I don't get.
Maybe I'm reading your post wrong. Are you saying it's ok to put something unrealistic in the show provided it fits with the motif? If so, then why aren't you complaining that there ain't any injuns? .... What about some cavalry with lots of blue clad soldiers carrying the US flag (with thirteen stars only o'course - coz there were only thirteen states then - he'd have to make it realistic now wouldn't he!?)
SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by DakotaSmith:Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
I believe it is implied (if it hasn't been stated directly) that FTL space travel does not exist in Firefly.
I'm confused, then. These various Earthlike planets aren't all in the Sol system, are they? They are working on the outer boundaries of an interstellar Alliance, correct?
If so, then they better have FTL spacecraft, or there's going to be a lot of time between episodes. I mean, for them just to get to Alpha Centauri would take four years ... meaning the next episode of Firefly would be due sometime in 2006 or 2007.
My theory is they used wormhole technology (not too far fetched) to send the "pioneers" into the Alliance solar system. My guess is a wormhole is made only on a very rare occasion, and the Earth is no longer a part of the Alliance system's concern (if it still exists, that is).
The planets are all in one solar system, ruled by 2 central planets, with many habitable moons available for terra-formation. Thus, FTL transportation might not be needed.
--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--
"Oh, shoot" - Mal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Are you saying it's ok to put something unrealistic in the show provided it fits with the motif?
There's a thing called artistic freedom, you may not have heard of it. It would be a good thing if you could suspend your disbelief a little to accomodate for that artistic expression.
I think it's absurd we are arguing the semantics of projectile weaponry in Firefly when we easily accept the fantasy (and that is what it is: FANTASY) of intelligent alien life (with space war-ships, no less) in every single other science fiction show ever (so maybe not every one, but you get my drift
).Maybe I'm not seeing something...
--Dylan Palmer, aka NoVaGrAsS--
"Oh, shoot" - Mal
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
The planets are all in one solar system, ruled by 2 central planets, with many habitable moons available for terra-formation. Thus, FTL transportation might not be needed.
Which would be born out by the comments of the two blue handed geezers at the end of The Train Job. They said, "We haven't travelled 87 million miles etc."
They made it sound as if it were a long way and yet, in terms of interstellar travel it's a few feet!
The only contradiction to that Novagrass, is the drunk dude in the bar at the beginning. He talked about the Alliance and the 'new Galaxy' - not sure how that fits.
SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As I understand it, current spacecraft have rather thin hulls, since the difference in pressure between inside and hard vacuum isn't actually that great; deepsea vessels require much thicker hulls. If you fired a slug-thrower or a laser in the Space Shuttle, everyone would proably die.
Firefly-era hulls might well be thicker and/or tougher - for one thing, radiation sheilding would be necessary, and since humanity has just ended a period of warfare, reinforced hulls would probably be a good idea. I'm betting there won't be any forcefields or sheilds either, so micrometeor impacts would require a pretty tough hull, too.
All that being said, the main reason for the guns, I'm sure, is for the western look. Also, the brutality of the frontier seems much grittier when you blow out someone's leg as opposed to neatly searing it.
Personally, none of the tech seems as advanced as I'd think it would be in 500 years - the ships strike me as being more what I'd expect to see in 200 years or less. I sometimes think they just choose the dates in SF without giving much thought to progress.
Mal: "Have you got time to do my hair?"
Inara: "Out."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
I think it's absurd we are arguing the semantics of projectile weaponry in Firefly when we easily accept the fantasy (and that is what it is: FANTASY) of intelligent alien life (with space war-ships, no less) in every single other science fiction show ever (so maybe not every one, but you get my drift
More specifically, humanoid alien life. That most ludicrous assumption in all of sci-fi.
--- Joe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What Novagrass said. You can complain about scientific accuracy all you want, but it misses the point. Joss isn't holding this show up, saying "I have seen the future. And it is FIREFLY."
Originally posted by SadGeezer:
Maybe I'm reading your post wrong. Are you saying it's ok to put something unrealistic in the show provided it fits with the motif? If so, then why aren't you complaining that there ain't any injuns? .... What about some cavalry with lots of blue clad soldiers carrying the US flag (with thirteen stars only o'course - coz there were only thirteen states then - he'd have to make it realistic now wouldn't he!?)
EDIT TO ADD:
Quote:Book's V.O. distinctly says "solar system." The drunk guy clearly was not "burdened with an overabundance of schooling." Also, the usage jibes with modern-day hyperbole. You don't really think the Miss Universe pageant is actually as inclusive as the title would suggest?
The only contradiction to that Novagrass, is the drunk dude in the bar at the beginning. He talked about the Alliance and the 'new Galaxy' - not sure how that fits.
--- Joe
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Novagrass:
I think it's absurd we are arguing the semantics of projectile weaponry in Firefly when we easily accept the fantasy (and that is what it is: FANTASY) of intelligent alien life (with space war-ships, no less) in every single other science fiction show ever (so maybe not every one, but you get my drift
There's science fiction and there's science fantasy. You should checkout the definitions.
I can't understand why you want to (interestingly) argue the finer points solar or stallar setting for the series - and yet you think it silly to talk about realism in the show!
The fact is (and nobody has come up with a viable arguiment yet) that some of the science in the show is unrealistic. If it's unrealistic then it's not science fiction - it's science fantasy or something else! That's all I'm trying to say.
Ok, ok. Let me explain it another way....
Another cool sci fi part of the show is the Serenity engins. They're like jet engines, they have turbines and exhaust manifolds and work in both the atmosphere and space (there is no air in space so you don't need exhaust manifolds). I think that this is an excellent bit of sci fi, it explains whey a ship can travel in space and land on the surface of the planet.
But, if they have the technology to build ships with multi-facetted engines, why are they using pump action shotguns and six-shooters to defend their lives! To me, that is unrealistic, it's sci fi for the motif's sake - I don't think that's a good thing.
You guys are being too defensive without being objective!
SadGeezers Guide to Firefly
http://www.sadgeezer.com/firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME