joss wheddon meeting with FX about new projects.

POSTED BY: BrownBug
UPDATED: Friday, February 12, 2010 00:46
VIEWED: 8092
PAGE 3 of 4

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 9, 2010 5:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:
Good points by all regarding our BDH, but Zeek makes for a strong case.

Fox saw dollar signs based the success of Buffy and Angel rather than look at the show to see if they wanted to support it (I'm pretty sure the same is true for JJ Abrams with Fringe).

Every single show is made for dollar signs - you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise. Yes, creators have a more creative stake - but the networks do not ever greenlight a show just becuase they think it might be good - they could care less about quality - it's all about the bottom line.

Quote:
Yes, Fox did buy the rights to the TV show Firefly and put it on air in the first place but they absolutely threw a monkey wrench into the pot and screwed things up royally. With Dollhouse, they had Eliza under contract and, well the rest is history. So I agree with Zeek that Fox went shopping with their eyes closed and then complained when they didn't like the color of the sweater they bought.

So again - who cares HOW they picked it? Would you rather they had looked first, said no, and we never got ANY Firefly?

Personally, I don't see that as a better option.

"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."

ZEEK

Tuesday, February 9, 2010 6:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
The botched their handling of it, yes. But I don't see how this changes the fact that we wouldn't have had the show AT ALL had they not given it a chance - even if it was a slim chance.

You're speculating that no one would have wanted it. We can't be sure one way or another, but if Fox thought Joss was a big money pinata then there's a decent chance another network would have the same idea. Especially considering they had right of first refusal and jumped on it. When the first buyer pounces there's a decent chance that somewhere down the line another buyer would be interested. Sure the show might have had a lower budget, but it wasn't the CGI or sets that hooked me.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
This is just incorrect, though. They didn't come to Joss at all. Dushku had a development deal with them, and they were excersizing it - but they let her choose her showrunner. She chose Joss, who then came up with the concept just for her.

I didn't say they came to Joss. They did greenlight his show though. I really doubt Eliza could have made up anything she wanted and had a guaranteed greenlight. They even mentioned in their renewal reasoning that Firefly sold well on DVD. So, it was on their mind one way or another.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 9, 2010 6:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
I really doubt Eliza could have made up anything she wanted and had a guaranteed greenlight.

Since no one said that.... yeah, disbelieving it would make sense....

And yes, it's speculation that it wouldn't have been picked up otherwise - just as it's speculation that it would have. But my speculation is based on the patterns shown by the other networks, and not on wishful thinking.

"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."

ZEEK

Tuesday, February 9, 2010 7:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
And yes, it's speculation that it wouldn't have been picked up otherwise - just as it's speculation that it would have. But my speculation is based on the patterns shown by the other networks, and not on wishful thinking.

How many vampire shows were on the air when Buffy and Angel were picked up? Clearly their existence is impossible due to your flawless logic.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 9, 2010 7:46 PM

You really, really don't like people disagreeing with you, do you? Because you keep throwing out stupid straw man arguments every time.

When Buffy was picked up, Forever Knight had just finished it's run (and thus was airing while Buffy was being developed). The Hunger was on then as well, as well as the British vampire series Ultraviolet. Also factor in that this was the tail end of the mid-90's vampire craze kicked off by Interview With The Vampire, AND Buffy being a well-known (if not well loved) movie, and only a fool (or someone who runs his mouth without doing their homework) would argue there were no other vampire shows at the time. When Angel was picked up.... Buffy was on the air.

As a matter of fact, there has been at least one vampire-related TV series on the air every year for the last two or three decades, with the odd non-vampire year snuck in on rare occasion. So, vampire shows do have a fairly solid track record. And just to head you off, yes, there has also been a space-based show of some sort on for that timeframe, but A) virtually none of them were network based (whereas most of the vampire ones, save FK, were) and B) almost all of them were based on existing properties, and thus had an established fanbase to draw from (which I'll point out again - Buffy had going for it to a degree).

I didn't say it was impossible (that would be your straw man). I said it was unlikely - and as I pointed out, I'm gauging this on precedent; which is not proof, but it is a better indicator that "because Zeek really really really thinks so". Precedent can be broken, but in the absence of other evidence, that's all there is.

So, before you go attacking my logic (with nonsensical comebacks to boot), try applying a little of your own. Because you've presented no logically reasoned argument - other than YOU'RE sure someone woulda bought it.... just because you are. Sorry, but your gut is hardly that compelling as evidence.

"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."

SHINYGOODGUY

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:04 PM

You' re right that the networks (ABC, CBS, NBC and now Fox) rely heavily on ratings and how that affects the landscape re: cashy-money.

But Fox did snap up Firefly, basically because, as aforementioned, dollar signs played a big part in their decision. I say, without hesitation, that had Fox dropped the ball on FF, one of the other network '800 lb. gorillas' would have pulled the trigger.

But we will never truly know that now. Bottom line is that Fox gambled on both FF and Dollhouse both because of JW's prior successes and their 'vision' of striking gold. The FF DVD sales only proved to fan the flames of greed, particularly when it came to Dollhouse decision making. Critically acclaimed shows have no place, within the grand scheme of things, in the land of network avarice (see FF, My So Called Life, Jericho, Joan of Arcadia and Studio 60).

Fox had quite a bit invested in FF, as with any show they put on the air, but that they felt could be improved upon - namely by them. So they made a few suggestions. One thing that they did not foresee in their infinite wisdom, just how much the true fans loved their heroes. The DVD sales showed them.

My argument has to do more with a network giving it's shows support and backing. FF was treated like a bastard child; what with preempting, poor scheduling and creative meddling. It's been said that Firefly was a show ahead of it's time, not for us - the true fans, but, as far as I'm concerned, for those Fox execs who, by their actions, had no clue.

My criticism is aimed at those that thought Firefly needed fixing. I don't care who did the picking, or why, as long as we got our BDH. It's my contention it would have happened regardless.

Tawabawho?

ZEEK

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
You really, really don't like people disagreeing with you, do you? Because you keep throwing out stupid straw man arguments every time.

When Buffy was picked up, Forever Knight had just finished it's run (and thus was airing while Buffy was being developed). The Hunger was on then as well, as well as the British vampire series Ultraviolet. Also factor in that this was the tail end of the mid-90's vampire craze kicked off by Interview With The Vampire, AND Buffy being a well-known (if not well loved) movie, and only a fool (or someone who runs his mouth without doing their homework) would argue there were no other vampire shows at the time. When Angel was picked up.... Buffy was on the air.

As a matter of fact, there has been at least one vampire-related TV series on the air every year for the last two or three decades, with the odd non-vampire year snuck in on rare occasion. So, vampire shows do have a fairly solid track record. And just to head you off, yes, there has also been a space-based show of some sort on for that timeframe, but A) virtually none of them were network based (whereas most of the vampire ones, save FK, were) and B) almost all of them were based on existing properties, and thus had an established fanbase to draw from (which I'll point out again - Buffy had going for it to a degree).

I didn't say it was impossible (that would be your straw man). I said it was unlikely - and as I pointed out, I'm gauging this on precedent; which is not proof, but it is a better indicator that "because Zeek really really really thinks so". Precedent can be broken, but in the absence of other evidence, that's all there is.

So, before you go attacking my logic (with nonsensical comebacks to boot), try applying a little of your own. Because you've presented no logically reasoned argument - other than YOU'RE sure someone woulda bought it.... just because you are. Sorry, but your gut is hardly that compelling as evidence.

I have problems with people who think thier opinions are the only valid ones.

I never said anything about network TV. So, the example is pretty much valid. Thanks for backing up that there were few vampire shows on the air just like there were few scifi shows.

OPPYH

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Shinygoodguy:

My argument has to do more with a network giving it's shows support and backing. FF was treated like a bastard child; what with preempting, poor scheduling and creative meddling. It's been said that Firefly was a show ahead of it's time, not for us - the true fans, but, as far as I'm concerned, for those Fox execs who, by their actions, had no clue.

Firefly was a Bastard child. This is why Fox:

Skipped the pilot episode initially(playing it last in the series....?..)

skipped episodes, and episodes out of order

didn't promote it properly(until after it was confirmed canceled, then the pilot was promoted like crazy....stupid right?)

Got decent Nielson ratings(5.7...higher than the first season of the X-Files) but still Fox couldn't wait to shut down the fucking show.
----------------------------------------------------
It all adds up to a monumental blunder on the behalf of Fox.

"Fox never got the show, it was a bad match"
Joss Whedon

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 8:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:

I have problems with people who think thier opinions are the only valid ones.

That's quite funny, since I never said that, even stipulated that it was speculation (you do realize that when someone says they're speculating, by the very nature of the word - they're NOT claiming it as fact...?)and you were the one that threw a temper tantrum because someone dared to disagree with your opinion - which you clearly think is the only one.

But at least I backed my opinion with evidence, which you continue not to do.

Quote:
I never said anything about network TV. So, the example is pretty much valid. Thanks for backing up that there were few vampire shows on the air just like there were few scifi shows.

You never specified, thus leaving yourself a way to backtrack regardless of what I said. Which is immaterial, since I addressed both the network and cable outlets.

And you implied that there were no vampire shows at the time. That "few" thing is just more backpedaling/goalpost changing.

So, no, your example isn't really valid - as you didn't even provide one, you just asked a rhetorical question designed to leave you an out no matter the response.

But you clearly think YOUR opinion IS the only true one (again, without any actual evidence) - and have made it clear you really don't like being challenged, because you can't stand up to it.

"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."

ZEEK

Wednesday, February 10, 2010 10:20 PM

I'm not going to go waste my time researching the number of scifi shows on the air at the time firefly was being considered. It's a waste of time. I don't even think it was a big consideration in the network's mind to begin with. The evidence I provided is Fox was the first network to have a chance to air Firefly and they took it. When you go 1 out of 1 that's very strong odds. Nothing you've said suggests that the very next studio to get a chance at "a new Joss Whedon show" would have passed.

So, if you're not convinced your opinion is the only correct one are you saying that's it perfectly valid for a person to believe that Firefly would have been picked up if Fox had passed on it?

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 NEXT PAGE