Serenity the Sequel or TV show?
POSTED BY: TragicStory
UPDATED: Monday, April 12, 2004 20:18
VIEWED: 9732
PAGE 4 of 5
Quote:
Originally posted by InvisibleGreen:
Sorry if I seemed angry.
Apolo-gee accepted - was more a chance to pun on my name that I couldn't pass by
Quote:
"Crusade" and "Firefly" actually have a lot of simularities. "Crusade" was shown pretty much completely out of order by TNT, like FOX's airing the pilot last, and both series have a couple of unfilmed scripts.
Let's not forget the studio interference. TnA wanted a space whore, gun fights and action, Fox wanted less Western - does anyone think they could just have swapped series and both been happy?
"I threw up on your bed"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Astriana:
could you also flip the coin and argue FOR a new series AND a sequel?
I like your thinking.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm just hoping for 'Serenity' to be a success, so we may get another movie. It seems unlikely that it'll come back to TV, ever. Unlike 'Family Guy', Serenity/Firefly need the actors who would, by then, have moved on to other projects.
A case in point, Gina Torres's signed on for one of the leads in a new ABC pilot 'Gramercy Park'. I hear ABC are serious about this, as they've been trying to get it going for the past year. I googled around, and found some spoilers. Family drama, strong role for her. A surgical nurse married to a heart surgeon. Second in command of a dysfunctional family. A little like Zoe, actually.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:Quote:
Originally posted by SadLittleKing:
I don't see Serenity being a huge success at the box office. If I'm correct (and judging by the series I think I am), the story will be deep, chalk full of interesting characters and dramatic situations with some nice action here and there...not the kind of shallow rollercoaster ride movie-goers flock to see.
Your description of Serenity could be used for some very sucessful movies like:
Titanic (where the only action really happens in the last reel). World-wide Box Office $1,835,300,000
Forrest Gump. World-wide Box Office $679,400,000
The Sixth Sense. World-wife Box Office $661,500,000
Ocean's Eleven. World-wife Box Office $444,200,000
Etc., etc., etc. The list goes on. Sure, big action movies do seem to top the box office, but there are plently of exceptions. There's a little movie that none of the studios thought had any chance for decient returns, that's currently on track to beat Titanic, called "The Passion Of Jesus Christ". Now I don't want to start a theological debate, but it's hardly a "shallow rollercoaster ride movie".
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
The difference with Serenity is that it doesn't have any big-name celebrities. Titanic had Leo DiCaprio, Gump had Tom Hanks, Sixth Sense had Bruce Willis, Ocean's Eleven had a bunch of big names, and Passion of the Christ has The Big Name, Himself (in a sense) and being directed by Mel Gibson probably didn't hurt.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Serenity will bomb (I'm very much rootin' for it), but I don't think it's gonna be a huge draw since the movie itself is without a huge draw.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:My understanding, based upon a JW interview, was that the low syndication value they were able to generate for Angel was the reason Angel was doomed. TNT is paying next to nothing to show those reruns ...
Originally posted by InvisibleGreen:Quote:
Originally posted by jgsugden:
Networks are intereted n series that can go 100 episodes and do well in syndication. That is why Angel was cancelled this season: It reached 100 episodes, but it looked to be failing as a syndication option, so it was bypassed. Fox would have been far wiser to hold off on syndicating it until it could be paired with Buffy on FX, reenergizing the Buffy viewings and supporting a stronger base for Angel views ...
Actually that has nothing to do with why Angel was cancelled. Angel has been airing in syndication this past year, since September, after striking a deal last May. Angel reruns were put into syndication after only 88 episodes, IMO due to the influence on DVD's on television.
Angel was cancelled because of Twentieth Century Fox's high and rising licensing fee, the high cost to ratings ratio (especially taking reruns into account), and the WB's strategy for revamping their network.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If you're looking for a 'level' of success they're hoping for, compare it to other Sci-fi films without big stars (at least, not big at the time). They're not looking for a blockbuster (though they wouldn't turn it down either). They're hoping for a solid performer - middle of the road.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Though I can some of the well thought arguements for why some think Firefly will never again be on TV, I still feel that film would not be a sufficient medium to tell the story of this ship or crew the way Joss intends it to be told. Sure, a movie is better than nothing, but I think it is just the hook for the return to the TV. One hour a week on TV is a far better way to convey a story than 2 hours every 2 to 3 years.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Double post
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Far better for who? Us, the fans? Joss Whedon and the acotrs? Or the people that make the decisions - the people that hold the rights. Regardless of what will tell the best story, the people that have a money stake in Firefly/Serenity are interested in money. If they think a second movie will be more lucrative than a series, there is no chance for a series. If they think they can get more money back by doing neither and investing in another project, Firefly is a goner.
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
Though I can some of the well thought arguements for why some think Firefly will never again be on TV, I still feel that film would not be a sufficient medium to tell the story of this ship or crew the way Joss intends it to be told. Sure, a movie is better than nothing, but I think it is just the hook for the return to the TV. One hour a week on TV is a far better way to convey a story than 2 hours every 2 to 3 years.
Movies and tv are businesses. They are there to make money. Everything they do, they do because somebody in a suit thinks it is the best way to make money.
If you want to see Firefly make it back to tv, you have to hope it is successful enough to warrant a series, but not successful enough to spawn a sequel movie. That is a very narrow range.
To add onto the difficulties, the actors and actresses that worked on Firefly have taken on other series work. They're not going to leave their new series to return to Firefly. If Firefly were to return as a series right after the movie, it would be without Gina Torres as she is in an ABC project that is receiving favorable treatment from the network and will likely be around for at least 2 years. Others took a shot at some pilots that didn't pan out, IIRC. They can sneak free to film a movie, but the days of doing multiple series on different networks are over ...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
JGsugden wrote:
Quote:
Far better for who? Us, the fans? Joss Whedon and the acotrs? Or the people that make the decisions - the people that hold the rights. Regardless of what will tell the best story, the people that have a money stake in Firefly/Serenity are interested in money. If they think a second movie will be more lucrative than a series, there is no chance for a series. If they think they can get more money back by doing neither and investing in another project, Firefly is a goner.
Better for Joss, to tell his story and do all he wants w/ Firefly. Better for the cast by giving them steady work on a show they all profess to love. Better for the us the fans by giving us more of what we want without the wait for movies. Better for new fans by having Firefly in their homes every week, not something that crops up every couple of years that they may forget or lose interest in. Better for the powers that be by giving them a product the consumers (us) want and are willing to pay for.
Quote:
Movies and tv are businesses. They are there to make money. Everything they do, they do because somebody in a suit thinks it is the best way to make money.
Not to be rude, but Duh! I think we all know that TV networks and movie studios are in the business for money, not simply to entertain the public or answer our whims.
Of course this does not mean that these "suits" make the best decisions or that all their decisions are the most profitable. They are afterall, only human.
Quote:
If you want to see Firefly make it back to tv, you have to hope it is successful enough to warrant a series, but not successful enough to spawn a sequel movie. That is a very narrow range.
I am not so sure that there is this narrow range where a property like Firefly can be too successful in theatres to go back to the big screen. A successful movie will draw interest and insure ratings. Look how many movies have spin offs to TV after successful stays in the box office.
Quote:
To add onto the difficulties, the actors and actresses that worked on Firefly have taken on other series work. They're not going to leave their new series to return to Firefly. If Firefly were to return as a series right after the movie, it would be without Gina Torres as she is in an ABC project that is receiving favorable treatment from the network and will likely be around for at least 2 years. Others took a shot at some pilots that didn't pan out, IIRC. They can sneak free to film a movie, but the days of doing multiple series on different networks are over ...
Some of the actors have work, but how concrete are those projects? Everyone was certain Nathan was locked in at NBC, but after the pilot taping NBC cancelled the project. That is the one thing you can rely on w/ network TV, that you can rely on nothing.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME