Serenity movie title

POSTED BY: tvdir
UPDATED: Sunday, March 14, 2004 21:00
VIEWED: 10028
PAGE 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

TVDIR

Sunday, March 7, 2004 10:12 PM

I was reading some posts about the "Serenity" title being used instead of "Firefly: The Movie."

We all read that Joss wanted the "Serenity" title to separate the movie from the TV series for the movie audience, but another reason could be...20th Century Fox (not the broadcast network) still owns the "Firefly" name and the series. Fox still distributes the show throughout the world; the company may still own the trademark rights.

For "Battlestar Galactica" fans, remember creator Glen Larson wanted to do a new BG series, but he didn't own the TV rights, so he planned to do a feature film, which couldn't be called "Battlestar Galactica." Nothing on TV at least. Universal owned the TV series rights, but couldn't stop it as a feature film.

There's a major difference between TV and film.

Something to consider.

Any case, we have a movie upcoming!!!!!

SLOWSMURF

Sunday, March 7, 2004 10:24 PM

They sold the movie rights fully, there is NO way they sold the ability to use every character, scenario, and set(the idea anyway) without also selling the name. They chose not to use "Firefly: The Big Damn Movie" and any other variation because they thought it best, not because they couldn't

RKLENSETH

Sunday, March 7, 2004 10:34 PM

No, FOX still owns Firefly partly or FOX wouldn't be able to sell it in their name as a DVD or broadcast in other countries in their name and on their foreign networks.

All FOX did was sell the movie rights to Universal but that means that FOX still gets some of the profits from the movie because they still partly own the characters, story etc...

So using Firefly in the title of the movie might mean that FOX gets more from the profits while not using it means that FOX will get less.

So this could also be a way to spite FOX, which I highly doubt. I think Joss Whedon just wanted to start fresh. He knows the fans know that the movie is going to be Serenity so we won't be confused but at the same time they can promote it as something new and fresh to a new audience. I think it is a pretty could marketing tactic.

Oh, and play Cantr II at www.cantr.net.

INVISIBLEGREEN

Sunday, March 7, 2004 10:45 PM

I think everyone's confusing FOX the network and 20th Century Fox the production company. FOX owned the rights to the 15 episodes (but not anymore-that expired) but 20th Century FOX own(s/ed--I'm not sure which) the characters, etc.

TVDIR

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:45 AM

You are correct. The FOX broadcast network has no rights to the series anymore. Those rights expired when the 2003-2004 season started in the fall. We are talking about 20th Century Fox (the studio), which produced and distributed Firefly. The studio may still own the name Firefly; this could be a strong reason for the "Serenity" title for the movie.

AURAPTOR

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 10:58 AM

Other rejected movie titles:

The whacky adventures of Capt. Mal Reynolds.

Revenge of the terrifying space monkeys.

Tams in Space

The Hero of Canton

This land.

The kingdom of Badger.

They don't like it when you shoot at 'em.

OUTLANDER

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 11:56 AM

Is it possable that they changed the title to Serenity so they could do a television series after the movie, without having to get the okay from Fox?

LISSA

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 6:23 PM

Tams in Space:) i like it!

~lissa, spwhore

JUGGERNAUT

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:00 PM

As is the case with all of us, I'm a huge, huge fan of the series, but I'll go on record as saying I think the title stinks.

That's right, stinks.

Sure, it means something to us, but imagine seeing it in a newspaper listing. "Serenity?" It may have well been called "Beaches" for all the good it'll do to bring in a non-affiliated moviegoer.

I don't have a better suggestion, which makes me a bad man for rousing rabble, but I just can't cotton to "Serenity."

BROWNCOAT1

Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Juggernaut:
As is the case with all of us, I'm a huge, huge fan of the series, but I'll go on record as saying I think the title stinks.

That's right, stinks.

Sure, it means something to us, but imagine seeing it in a newspaper listing. "Serenity?" It may have well been called "Beaches" for all the good it'll do to bring in a non-affiliated moviegoer.

I don't have a better suggestion, which makes me a bad man for rousing rabble, but I just can't cotton to "Serenity."

Well, if it is any consolation, it is only a working title, it could very well change. Joss is simply trying to separate the movie from the stigma of a cancelled series.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE