Serenity Ticket Sales Hurt By Broken Rule?

POSTED BY: two
UPDATED: Thursday, February 25, 2010 23:07
VIEWED: 15577
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

TWO

Saturday, February 20, 2010 6:51 PM

I'm sorry to postulate that Serenity's ticket sales were hurt by film editing. More specifically, the length of shots in Serenity didn't follow the formula. For example, that super long tracking shot going from bow to stern of Serenity. "Shots are continuous runs of frames from a particular point of view of the camera; they are separated by transitions of various kinds—cuts, dissolves, fades, wipes, and others. Cuts—abrupt discontinuities from one frame to the next—make up more than 99% of transitions in contemporary film."

Successful Hollywood movies follow a mathematical formula www.physorg.com/news185781475.html
February 19, 2010 by Lin Edwards
(PhysOrg.com) -- Hollywood movies have found a mathematical formula that lets them match the effects of their shots to the attention spans of their audiences.

Psychologist Professor James Cutting and his team from Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, analyzed 150 high-grossing Hollywood films released from 1935 to 2005 and discovered the shot lengths in the more recent movies followed the same mathematical pattern that describes the human attention span. The pattern was derived by scientists at the University of Texas in Austin in the 1990s who studied the attention spans of subjects performing hundreds of trials. The team then converted the measurements of their attention spans into wave forms using a mathematical technique known as the Fourier transform.

They found that the magnitude of the waves increased as their frequency decreased, a pattern known as pink noise, or 1/f fluctuation, which means that attention spans of the same lengths recurred at regular intervals. The same pattern has been found by Benoit Mandelbrot (the chaos theorist) in the annual flood levels of the Nile, and has been seen by others in air turbulence, and also in music.

Cutting made his discovery by measuring the length of every shot in 150 comedy, drama and action films, and then converted the measurements into waves for every movie. He found that the more recent the films were, the more likely they were to obey the 1/f fluctuation, and this did not just apply to fast action movies. Cutting said the significant thing is that shots of similar lengths recur in a regular pattern through the film.

Cutting believes obeying the 1/f law makes films “resonate with the rhythm of human attention spans,” and this makes them more gripping. Films edited in this way would then tend to be more successful and the style of shooting and editing more likely to be copied. Films of Cutting’s own favorite genre, the Film Noir, do not generally follow the 1/f law, with shot lengths tending to be more random. By contrast The Empire Strikes Back (1980) and the 2005 blockbuster movie Star Wars Episode III (which Cutting considers to be “just dreadful”) both follow 1/f rigidly.

The researchers concluded that over the next few decades film makers may take more care to follow the 1/f law to try to boost audience engagement.

More information: Attention and the Evolution of Hollywood Film; James E. Cutting, Jordan E. DeLong and Christine E. Nothelfer, Psychological Science published online 5 February 2010. Full text of the paper is available here.
http://people.psych.cornell.edu/~jec7/pubs/cuttingetalpsychsci10.pdf

The list of movies studied:
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/suppl/2010/02/05/0956797610361679.DC2/C
uttingRevSupplementalMaterial.pdf

KATESFRIEND

Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:04 PM

It makes sense that the timing in a movie works to create an emotional impression in so short a time. I'd like to think that art is not that predictable, but if this is so, art and creativity is going to take a back seat to finance in the movies of the future.

CHRISISALL

Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:31 PM

People need to adjust their attention to the ART, not vica versa. I like 2001, and I like Star Wars. Both feature different ends of the editing spectrum.
Look at Superman & Lethal Weapon 2- the editing pace varies in those flicks QUITE a bit.
Movies that do not jar you in any significant way in terms of pacing are just comfortable neural candy. Does that seem right to you?

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Saturday, February 20, 2010 11:43 PM

Two, you've made assertions of this type before, and every time you do I will reply thusly.

Serenity's failure at the box office was not because people did not like what they saw on the screen, (editing, character fates, whatever) but rather because there were not enough people that paid to see it in the first place.

You can dislike it and say whatever you want about the film, but as a long-time student of motion pictures I can tell you that without a doubt in my mind Joss hit a home run on his first try in the big leagues. In fact the editing was one of the best things about it.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

FEARTHEBUNNYMAN

Saturday, February 20, 2010 11:56 PM

Yah I had never even heard of Serenity until a couple years ago. Lack of marketing, lack of familiarity with the show it came from (which also had no marketing - I don't recall hearing a thing about Firefly when it was on either) is what killed the box office. POS films have huge box offices all the time b/c they market the heck out of them and people will go see something they've heard of regardless of quality. If no one hears about or film or TV show they aren't going to buy a ticket when they are at the theater deciding what to see, and they obviously won't know to go out of their way to see it in the first place.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
In fact the editing was one of the best things about it.

Lisa is great, no?

The laughing Chrisisall

FREMDFIRMA

Sunday, February 21, 2010 12:44 AM

Nah, I don't buy it.

Lack of marketing and trying a little too hard to bridge between devoted and would-be browncoats didn't help, there's a couple places where if you hadn't seen the series, you were gonna be a bit lost - but for the budget and effort it was a damned nice try.

As for that "theory" - yanno, that's the stupidity behind something that annoys me greatly, cause a lot of mainstream music (especially club-mix) is computer-produced with similar software, and theoretically, IF that concept is true, it should sell like hotcakes.

But it don't.

Not because of "piracy" or poor marketing, but because it's got no heart, no fire, it's nothing but a stale drone of homogenized go-se, and while you might get the horde of pre-programmed teeny boppers to buy it if you shill it hard enough, IT DOESN'T ROCK.

Gene Simmons had to lecture one potential replacement Guitarist for KISS, that yes, wild riffs sound kinda cool here and there, but music, art, really, is about human expression, not skill and speed, and if you put heart, soul and decent lyrics behind a standard issue 4/4, you can make it rock the house, versus your angry bee guitar solo with no spirit at all cause you're just tryin too hard to impress.

I mean, according to this theory, throwing down a C-D-E Power Riff should send people running for the exits...

They don't seem to be headed for the exit to me, how bout you ?
THAT is art, it's rooted in our humanity, something computers do not, and never likely will, have - try having your computer engage an audience like this, neh ?

So!
*snaps fingers*
THAT for your precious theory!

-Frem

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 1:01 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Two, you've made assertions of this type before, and every time you do I will reply thusly.

Serenity's failure at the box office was not because people did not like what they saw on the screen, (editing, character fates, whatever) but rather because there were not enough people that paid to see it in the first place.

You can dislike it and say whatever you want about the film, but as a long-time student of motion pictures I can tell you that without a doubt in my mind Joss hit a home run on his first try in the big leagues. In fact the editing was one of the best things about it.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

I'm two and I loved Serenity. I saw it 4 times at the theatre, twice as many times as my next most frequently seen movie, StarWars, the one reissued in 1990's. I was buying friends tickets and meals so they would come and see Serenity with me. I thought it odd that my friends were not as impressed with the movie. They enlightened to me, which is what friends do.

ecgordon, you don't know what think you know. Joss hit a double, not a home run. Don't get carried away with love for Serenity.

Serenity was Joss Whedon's very first movie as a director. He was a beginner. StarWars was not George Lucas' first major film. Lucas worked and reworked the early and very bad StarWars scripts over and over for years to make a beauty. Joss Whedon had several movie scripts before Serenity. It shows because he got his finished in months. Great script, too, different than what got made. That 190 page script had a serious trimming because of the small budget. Small production budget, small advertisement budget and small audience kind of all go together.

ecgordon, exclusively for you I painstakingly took a xerox of Joss Whedon's script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, and turned it into an Adobe Reader pdf file. Go and Read:
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

That script would have cost twice as much to make, but it would have been a smashing hit. We would be seeing Serenity 3 this summer, if only there had been more money in the Universal Pictures budget for Serenity...

ECGORDON

Sunday, February 21, 2010 1:11 AM

I've read the original script but I don't agree it is a better one. My argument was that the editing cannot be what doomed Serenity because there were not enough people who saw it who would have disliked the editing enough to spread negative word about the film. Serenity failed solely because not enough people saw it in the theater. Period. Exclamation Point! Underlined. Got that now?

And Serenity is better than Star Wars in many ways, just not box office appeal.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 2:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
I've read the original script but I don't agree it is a better one. My argument was that the editing cannot be what doomed Serenity because there were not enough people who saw it who would have disliked the editing enough to spread negative word about the film. Serenity failed solely because not enough people saw it in the theater. Period. Exclamation Point! Underlined. Got that now?

And Serenity is better than Star Wars in many ways, just not box office appeal.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

Your argument (Serenity failed to make enough money because people did not spend enough money buying tickets) is called a tautology. Sadly, I'm home on a Saturday night, so I can argue. From wiki: In rhetoric, a tautology is an unnecessary or unessential (and sometimes unintentional) repetition of meaning, using different and dissimilar words that effectively say the same thing twice. It is often regarded as a fault of style...

A few things that my friends who are smarter than me didn't like about Serenity. Some of these problems could have been fixed with more money.

1) Jayne walking on his leg after being speared by Reavers. Myriam, who spent a week in the hospital after breaking a bone there, said she couldn't believe it.
2) The Operative's pinch of death on Doctor Mathias' love-handle. That pinch doesn't exist because nobody's body works like that, unless they are aliens.
3) Mal's quick-draw on the Operative: Afterward, why did Mal turn his back on the Operative? Why not kill the Op immediately? Even dumb me noticed the first time I saw the movie. If you read the original 190 page script you will see why Mal was forced by his location to turn his back. Budget restraints changed the setting. Mal and the Op were so close Mal could spit in the Op's face! The script should have been revised or more money should have been used to build a bigger set.
4) Jayne's drunken plan to put River on the shuttle. Who would believe that the shuttle will be able to speed away faster than Serenity can follow? The original 190 page script had a much more sensible and exciting plan for Jayne to give River to the Alliance.
5) Once the Alliance had their guns on River, the story ended 30 seconds later. It can't end now! That's too rushed! It needed to be stretched out another minute because this is the best part of the movie. I wrote how I would do it while keeping the ending exactly the same: http://www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=12835
It would cost more money, but the better the ending, the more tickets sold.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

ECGORDON

Sunday, February 21, 2010 3:43 AM

Talk about a tautology. You can spin it any way you like, but I know my opinion is sufficient for me. You are saying that not enough people bought tickets to Serenity because it didn't adhere to the most efficient editing structure. How would they know that if they hadn't seen it, and if they saw it they must have bought a ticket, right?

Check back through the thread and see how many people agreed with you. In order for your theory to be correct many people who were dissatisfied with the film would have had to bad-mouth it to many others, or its faults would had to have been pointed out in negative critical reviews. At the time of its release Serenity had something like a 84% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, so most reviews were positive.

The fact of the matter is that not enough people were aware of Firefly, and thus not enough anticipating Serenity, or else they knew Firefly had been canceled and figured it couldn't be a very good story. You must be aware that a lot of current Firefly/Serenity fans didn't come aboard until after the BDM was released to DVD, and had not been aware of the series until then as well.

How could people not like the film and not buy tickets for it due to bad editing if they didn't see it in the theater to begin with? You have not answered that question yet.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

PIRATENEWS

Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:24 AM

Brainwashing formula does work on the masses of sheeple, who only watch it one time. Trance state allows NLP of subliminals.

Intelligent students, however, look deeper, and often.

I still say Fox sabotaged it due to MKULTRA content, and forshadowing of the NWO's merger of USA and Commie China. Fox is 1/2 owned by Commie China since 1999, when Rupert Murdoch married Deng Wen Di.

River was successfully deprogrammed and was a succesful whistleblower, topics that are generally verboten. Whistleblowers are supposed to die horrible deaths, to deter future whistleblowing (Manchurian Candidate, which was purchased and blacklisted by CIA/Mafiosi Frank Sinatra). CIA's Project Monarch slaves are supposed to die at age 30, or remain sleepers. Deprogrammed, they raise heck like Cathy O'Brien. Mind control, and how to beat it, is Joss' fav script...

Hollywood is funded for its predictive programming, which now is about the End Of The World, extinction of the human race, and rise of the New World Odor global dictatorship. Serenity killed the NWO, something that's not supposed to happen. Can't be givin hope to the unwashed masses. Especially with seccession a daily topic in the news today. The South just might rise again! Even Justice Scalia mentioned it this week, threatening Civil War if States quit the Union.

The only reason FF and Serenity were allowed to exist was because they do stick to the script of predictive programming. But they deviated enough to get spanked by the studios.

This same game is played in every workplace. Try talking polyticks to bosses and customers and see how soon you get fired, passed over for promotion, or assigned a dead-end job.

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 2:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
...You have not answered that question yet.

I'm too cocksure to answer. Someone else already wrote the answer. Read “Second guessing Serenity” at
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing-continu
ed.html This explains how movies work.

Joss Whedon could learn from James Cameron's mistakes. There are reasons why Avatar cost seven times more than Serenity to make. It wasn't just the 3D technology and motion capture. It cost what Serenity cost to fix what got screwed up in Cameron's Avatar script.

Avatar had some gut churning/vomit inducing mistakes. These got fixed late in the production. If the mistakes hadn't been removed, they would have hurt ticket sales. Imagine a rental car that has a cat turd on the rear passenger seat. Wouldn't you return to the clerk and ask for another car? I hope you would not ignore it, even if you're not sitting on the tiny turd. To some people, little things like that make a big difference in rental cars and movies. You can still see the mistakes that could have been left in the finished Avatar movie, but weren't, by reading http://www.foxscreenings.com/media/pdf/JamesCameronAVATAR.pdf
Page 136 WAINFLEET cuts Tsu’tey's queue off near the base. Very nasty.
TSU’TEY SCREAMS in agony, his nervous system exploding on overload.
Page 143 Trudy dies in kamikaze run. I have a low opinion of kamikazes. The Japanese would admire it, but who else would?
These are mistakes that James Cameron could have ignored by pretending everything was good enough and it is the audience's fault when his movie brings in only $800,000,000 around the world because of the ( mixed metaphor ) cat turds still in the back seat of Avatar. Joss Whedon could learn from James Cameron's corrected mistakes.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

AURAPTOR

Sunday, February 21, 2010 2:55 PM

Side issue -

I think the advertising for TBDM left something to be desired. Bus stop poster ads would have been a perfect fit for some of the major markets, big cities and major university areas where much of the population uses mass transit.

Bones: "Don't 'rawr' her!"
Booth: "What? she'rawred' me first.

EVILDINOSAUR

Sunday, February 21, 2010 3:10 PM

I disagree, the opening shot to Serenity is one of my favorite shots in any move ever. I love how unique it is. When I go to the movies, I'm not looking to see the same thing that I've seen hundreds of times before, maybe that's why I don't care for most of the crap thats in the theaters these days, Avatar included.

"Haha, mine is an evil laugh."

IMNOTHERE

Sunday, February 21, 2010 3:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Your argument (Serenity failed to make enough money because people did not spend enough money buying tickets) is called a tautology.

...while you are looking up big words on Wikipedia, perhaps you should also look up "straw man":

Quote:
To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

The actual argument (from ecgordon) was:

Quote:

Serenity's failure at the box office was not because people did not like what they saw on the screen, (editing, character fates, whatever) but rather because there were not enough people that paid to see it in the first place.

Serenity was a hard sell (based on a canceled TV series, no big-name actors) and the studio failed to promote it vigorously enough outside the Firefly fanbase. Where they did promote it, they relied too much on "By the creator of Buffy and Angel" (which many potential punters would see as kids shows) and (in the UK, at least) the posters made it look like "Buffy in space" and although there were a few TV ads, they stopped as soon as the film was actually released (duh!) - c.f. the latest teen gross-out comedy where you'll see TV ads showing people coming out of the cinema raving about it.

My (admittedly high-risk) solution would have been to stick with the original release date and put it up against Star Wars III in the summer - then encourage the media to pick up the "David vs. Golliath" angle and turn it into a "story".

There's a reason why they don't release big films in November...

DALILABA

Sunday, February 21, 2010 3:57 PM

Can I just say that when I saw Serenity on opening night there were only about 15 people in the theater. I never saw any adds for it on TV, and although it did get good reviews,there was very little buzz in the media.
Poor marketing killed Serenity.

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 4:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by EvilDinosaur:
I disagree, the opening shot to Serenity is one of my favorite shots in any move ever. I love how unique it is. When I go to the movies, I'm not looking to see the same thing that I've seen hundreds of times before, maybe that's why I don't care for most of the crap thats in the theaters these days, Avatar included.

"Haha, mine is an evil laugh."

Was that the Universal Studios world symbol changing into a real earth with spaceships being launched? I liked that but I liked much better the first scene with Serenity approaching the atmosphere, trailing flames. Everything before that was a "Previously on Firefly" recap of past episodes. This was the true beginning of Serenity.

Me and the critics don't think Avatar is crap.
The Rotten Egg rating and Worldwide box office:
94% Good Hair $4,154,249
89% Zombieland $102,053,484
82% Avatar $2,394,949,760
81% Serenity $38,869,464
20% Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen $835,274,255

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 4:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dalilaba:
Can I just say that when I saw Serenity on opening night there were only about 15 people in the theater. I never saw any adds for it on TV, and although it did get good reviews,there was very little buzz in the media.
Poor marketing killed Serenity.

You should read “Second guessing Serenity” at
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing-continu
ed.html which explains:
A lot of comments on my earlier post and on Whedonesque claim that Serenity underperformed because of bad marketing.

I have to disagree. $25M box office means the film got out there. There were enough people who saw it for it to have great word of mouth, had they felt like telling their friends. Much as I am a huge fan of Joss, and the Jossverse, and Firefly, the movie did not work that well for the mainstream audience. Or it would have been a sleeper hit.

You can say (and some do), "Anecdotally, non-Browncoats liked the movie." But either they did not like it enough to recommend it to other Firefly non-fans; or when they told you they liked it, they were just being nice.

Great marketing gets you a great opening weekend. It cannot make a flop into a hit. (Film marketers like to point to a great opening weekend, followed by a severe drop-off, as evidence that they successfully sold a piece of crap. Any fool can market a good movie.)

To a certain extent, bad marketing on a good movie means that the theaters will bump the movie, and it can get squeezed out of the marketplace. But exhibitors make a much higher percentage of box office the longer a movie runs. If I remember correctly, the movie theater gives the studio 50% of the opening weekend's take, but eventually the percentage works its way down to as low as 10%. That gives theater owners a huge incentive to support a sleeper. Serenity was out there for at least a month; certainly long enough for word of mouth to reverse any failure to get the cast on Leno, or any weaknesses in the trailer, or what have you.

Everyone likes to blame weak marketing when their film flops. But 20th Century Fox famously "dumped" a little movie called Star Wars, and it was not until the overwhelming audience reaction in a few college towns (like Cambridge, MA) that they mounted a decent ad campaign. (I knew a guy who managed a theater in Harvard Square. Fox had so little faith in the movie they refused to let him hold the movie over after the preview screenings. He mortgaged his house and bought Fox stock. He knew. They didn't.) If a half million people see your film opening weekend, you can't blame marketing for its subsequent failure. How many people saw The Full Monty on opening weekend? Was it even a hundred thousand? It went on to make a hundred million dollars.

Whether Serenity is a good movie or not is a matter of taste; probably it has a lot to do with your tolerance of, or love for, space opera. It's also a matter of perspective. Blade Runner flopped but has become a classic, casting a spell on two decades worth of dystopian futures. If Serenity winds up influencing science fiction movies to come, then we can say that it was a great movie even if it didn't blow the roof off the box office. However, if you believe that it "ought to have been" a popular movie, and failed only because the studio didn't back Joss, then you are misunderstanding the relationship between the filmmaker and the audience. Writers (and their fans) are not entitled to say "They ought to have liked it." Or, if they do, it's just not useful. It's like a comedian who says, "Well, I was just over their heads." If they don't laugh, it's not funny.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
In rhetoric, a tautology is an unnecessary or unessential (and sometimes unintentional) repetition of meaning, using different and dissimilar words that effectively say the same thing twice. It is often regarded as a fault of style...

LOL, is the English lesson over for today?
Wow, a little knowledge is certainly a dangerous thing, eh?

Serenity failed because of TWO things. As Ec stated, not enough ticket sales. Then there's the Blade Runner syndrome. Did peeps bounce out of the theatre all revved up & happy? No. Imagine if The Empire Strikes Back had been the first Star Wars movie. The series would have ended right there.

Serenity was a phenomenal flick. Just poorly advertised & a little dark.

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:08 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:

How could people not like the film and not buy tickets for it due to bad editing if they didn't see it in the theater to begin with?

They must have checked on http/isthisfilmeditedbythenumbers.com

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:

... Serenity was a phenomenal flick. Just poorly advertised & a little dark.
The laughing Chrisisall

And Avatar wasn't “dark”? Did the fluorescent colors confuse you? Did you notice all those people that died? They had names. They weren't just “Red Shirt #1 to #99” Did you notice that Jake's brother died violently? Did you notice that Jake did not wake up from his coma? Did you notice that Dr. Grace Augustine died doing what Jake was doing at the end of Avatar? In StarWars, did you notice that Luke's aunt and uncle were burnt corpses? All those pilots shot down attacking the Death Star? I'm fairly sure you are not suppose to forget the deaths. That is what makes the victory sweet. Otherwise the victory in the movie is as unimportant as a victory in a high school football game, ten years later.

Calling Serenity “dark” doesn't explain low ticket sales for Serenity.

And it is a childish myth that poor marketing doomed Serenity. “Second guessing Serenity” at
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing-continu
ed.html
Everyone likes to blame weak marketing when their film flops. But 20th Century Fox famously "dumped" a little movie called Star Wars, and it was not until the overwhelming audience reaction in a few college towns (like Cambridge, MA) that they mounted a decent ad campaign. (I knew a guy who managed a theater in Harvard Square. Fox had so little faith in the movie they refused to let him hold the movie over after the preview screenings. He mortgaged his house and bought Fox stock. He knew. They didn't.) If a half million people see your film [Serenity] opening weekend, you can't blame marketing for its subsequent failure. How many people saw The Full Monty on opening weekend? Was it even a hundred thousand? It went on to make a hundred million dollars.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

And Avatar wasn't “dark”?

No. Because it sent you out of the theatre HAPPY.

Quote:

And it is a childish myth that poor marketing doomed Serenity.

And it's a childish belief on your part that you alone possess all the answers.

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by two:

And Avatar wasn't “dark”?
No. Because it sent you out of the theatre HAPPY.
Quote:

And it is a childish myth that poor marketing doomed Serenity.
And it's a childish belief on your part that you alone possess all the answers.

The laughing Chrisisall

It's not me with the answers. It is Alex Epstein. Go look at his blog.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

IMNOTHERE

Sunday, February 21, 2010 5:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Imagine if The Empire Strikes Back had been the first Star Wars movie. The series would have ended right there.

For that matter, imagine if the original "Star Wars" had been pulled from cinemas after only a few weeks...

...or what if Star Wars had come out after DVDs and widescreen TVs. Would people have queued to see it time and time again if they'd known that the DVD would be out in a few months?

Of course, what we don't know is exactly how much money Serenity made on DVD. Or how many Firefly DVD sets it sold (they certainly shot back up the Amazon charts when the movie came out). Of course, the Firefly DVD money would have gone to Fox, not Universal - had it been otherwise I suspect that we'd have seen Serenity 2.

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
It's not me with the answers. It is Alex Epstein. Go look at his blog.

Oh, so it's your leader's ideas you express.
Sorry, free-thinkers here. Sheep would be elsewhere.

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:18 PM

An after the fact assessment of Serenity's failure at the box office cannot tell us why people did not go to see it initially. I read many reviews before the fact and I don't recall one of them mentioning an editing issue, in fact many had very good things to say about the opening sequences.

The only other thing I'm gonna say on the subject is something I've already said. Look back through the thread and see how many people agreed with you (or your impeccable source) and how many agreed with me.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

ECGORDON

Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:27 PM

Okay, I lied. I'm gonna say one more thing.

Two, for someone who says they liked Serenity and bought many tickets to see it for yourself and others, you seem to be going out of your way to say bad things about it and why it underperformed.

Four and a half years after its release is hardly the time to be harping on this. What the fuck difference does it make now? It's not like Uni is going to give Joss the chance to go back and edit his film for re-release, and I am positive he wouldn't do that even if they wanted him to. He has stated on numerous occasions that Serenity as released on September 30, 2005 is the film as he wanted it to be. Let's leave it at that.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 7:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by two:
It's not me with the answers. It is Alex Epstein. Go look at his blog.

Oh, so it's your leader's ideas you express.
Sorry, free-thinkers here. Sheep would be elsewhere.

The laughing Chrisisall

Alex Epstein is not my leader. He does write screenplays that are produced. His opinion counts for something because he has experience in the movies. You can actually know the man. http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/

Epstein wrote about Serenity
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing.html
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing-continu
ed.html

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

TWO

Sunday, February 21, 2010 7:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
... What the fuck difference does it make now?...

You are tired and cranky today. For chrisisall, google lists 5,060 entries at fireflyfans.net For ecgordon, 2,390
Why not rest your fingers? You don't have much to show for all that effort. It is not in your profiles:
http://www.fireflyfans.net/showprofile.asp?un=chrisisall
http://www.fireflyfans.net/showprofile.asp?un=ecgordon

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 9:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Alex Epstein is not my leader. He does write screenplays that are produced. His opinion counts for something because he has experience in the movies.

Umm.... have you SEEN any of the (4) movies he's written?

No, I didn't thinks so. Most peeps haven't.

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Sunday, February 21, 2010 9:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
For chrisisall, google lists 5,060 entries at fireflyfans.net For ecgordon, 2,390
Why not rest your fingers? You don't have much to show for all that effort. It is not in your profiles:

I'm gonna take the liberty of speaking for Ec here as well as myself and offer up a polite *effue*.

BTW, YOUR profile leads me to believe you have no life at all outside hating on Serenity...

Quote:
two
The 190 page Serenity script where Wash lives is at www.mediafire.com/two

Also, the Joss Whedon script is at
www.fileden.com/files/2008/8/13/2048723/Serenity-190pages.pdf

Second guessing Serenity is at
http://complicationsensue.blogspot.com/2006/07/second-guessing-continu
ed.html

Shall I take THIS as all you are as well?

See how polite I'm being? I think I've grown.

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Sunday, February 21, 2010 11:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
You are tired and cranky today.

I used the F word for emphasis. Even though there have been other unrelated things happening today to make me a bit cranky, you certainly have made it much easier to get totally pissed off.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

TWO

Monday, February 22, 2010 1:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Alex Epstein is not my leader. He does write screenplays that are produced. His opinion counts for something because he has experience in the movies.
Umm.... have you SEEN any of the (4) movies he's written?

No, I didn't thinks so. Most peeps haven't.

The laughing Chrisisall

I saw Epstein's Bon Cop, Bad Cop [2006] on a disc from Netflix www.imdb.com/title/tt0479647/
A cop-buddy movie in Canada. 67% on Rotten Tomatoes, $12,735,126
www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10007333-bon_cop_bad_cop/
www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=boncopbadcop.htm

GWEK

Monday, February 22, 2010 2:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Imagine if The Empire Strikes Back had been the first Star Wars movie. The series would have ended right there.

I must respectfully disagree. When I saw Star Wars in 1977, I loved the movie and hoped that the series would continue. When I saw ESB in 1980, I loved the movie and NEEDED for the series to continue. In my lifetime, I don't think there has been ANY piece of fiction (movie, TV show, book, comic, whatever) that stoked the fires like ESB.

Now, on the main point... At this point, does it much matter when SERENITY failed? What matters is that it DID fail, and that we've been denied sequels. :(

All the discussion in the world will not change the box office take.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 2:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:

I must respectfully disagree.

My point was, that The Original Star Wars movie was SO upbeat at the end, that the darkness of TESB could be tolerated.
Coming seemingly out of nowhere to most movie-goers, Serenity was an immediate downer, and word-of-mouth recommendations to folk wanting nothing but a good time might have been a little thin.
The solid fan-base was there, but the new-to-the-Verse peeps were flimsy at best.
IMO.

The laughing Chrisisall

GINOBIFFARONI

Monday, February 22, 2010 3:15 AM

On a completely unrelated to this discussion note

Chris knows what I mean

now back you regularly scheduled movie conversation

GWEK

Monday, February 22, 2010 3:20 AM

Yeah, I got your point. I don't necessarily see the comparison, though. I think the "darkness" of ESB is "tolerable" because it's a better movie.

The very existence of SERENITY of an amazing feat (done the impossible, indeed), but the movie that resulted was hampered by having to serve two totally different audiences in two different ways (both the hard-core fans and those who had never heard of FIREFLY). By dividing its attention, it does a decent job, but not a spectacular one.

I would further posit that SERENITY's failure (as well as that of FIREFLY) has a lot to do with timing. While SOME movies are timeless, the fantastic black-and-white universe of STAR WARS would not have faired partcularly well in, say, 1985 (nor would the world have been ready for Quentin Tarantino). I have a strong inkling that if FIREFLY were on the air today, it would do much better when the American audience of 2010 than with the American audience of 2002.

www.stillflying.net: "Here's how it might have been..."

STORYMARK

Monday, February 22, 2010 5:23 AM

Nope. The theory might apply if lots of people had seen the movie, and didn't like it. But that's not the case. Not many saw it, and thus could not be effected by the editing of the film.

"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."

TWO

Monday, February 22, 2010 2:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Two, for someone who says they liked Serenity and bought many tickets to see it for yourself and others, you seem to be going out of your way to say bad things about it and why it underperformed.

Four and a half years after its release is hardly the time to be harping on this. What ... difference does it make now?...

Why am I critical of Serenity?
Imagine I am chauffeuring Serenity, Joss Whedon's precocious 5 year old child, to her first day at her new school. As she waves bye-bye to her Daddy, I tell her to take off the Jayne Hat. “It is hot outside, dear,” I'll say. I don't say that the other children will mock her hat. Serenity is the same adorable child that Joss created, but without a hat she looks better. Before I let Serenity out of the limousine at school, I help her blow her cute little nose. What a beautiful child. But those green boogers... Yikes!

Joss pays me what my critical service is worth. Nothing. If you love Serenity way too much, you don't notice her snot or her goofy hat. For some reason I visualize little Serenity Whedon to look like Summer Glau when she was five.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

STORYMARK

Monday, February 22, 2010 5:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by GWEK:

I must respectfully disagree.
My point was, that The Original Star Wars movie was SO upbeat at the end, that the darkness of TESB could be tolerated.
Coming seemingly out of nowhere to most movie-goers, Serenity was an immediate downer, and word-of-mouth recommendations to folk wanting nothing but a good time might have been a little thin.
The solid fan-base was there, but the new-to-the-Verse peeps were flimsy at best.
IMO.

The laughing Chrisisall

That tracks more to the marketing than the film itself, though.

"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."

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 5:59 PM

Story, let's say Wash lived, and the broadwaved message destroyed the Alliance Parliament, and our BDH's got medals from the new, freedom & independence-loving government...
Tell me THAT wouldn't have caused more ticket sales.

Happy-happy sells IMO.

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Monday, February 22, 2010 7:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Story, let's say Wash lived, and the broadwaved message destroyed the Alliance Parliament, and our BDH's got medals from the new, freedom & independence-loving government...
Tell me THAT wouldn't have caused more ticket sales.

Happy-happy sells IMO.

The laughing Chrisisall

Believability sells better than happy-happy.

If you refuse to acknowledge that making a movie more believable means more tickets sold, stop reading now. Go away. Never come back. If you believe that Avatar would have sold as many tickets if the animation techniques were used from Disney's Pinocchio 70th Anniversary Edition, please stop reading.

The Operative kills three men in front of Doctor Mathias' nervous young female intern, then he tells the intern, “I'll need all the logs on behavioral modification triggers.” Do you believe she really is going to be able to do that after 3 murders? You know perfectly well that a real intern will piss herself and faint dead away. I would after seeing my boss and two security guards cut down with a sword. All by itself, the security guard's loud gunshot noise indoors would loosen my bowels. (Maybe if the Operative quietly killed only my obnoxious boss, I'd be cheering, but you get my point.)

The movie audience senses subconsciously that nobody acts like the Operative expects the intern to act -- able to find River's records and extract what the Operative needs. Here is how the screenplay could have fixed the intern problem and, as a bonus, the Operative turns into a bigger, badder bad-ass, which also means more tickets sold.

The movie changes when Doctor Mathias sarcastically says, “Unfortunately I forgot to bring a sword.”
The Operative replies, “We should continue in private. I have a message from Parliament exclusively for you.” I love sneaky villains.
Doctor Mathias says to the intern, “Bring tea.” She exists. The Operative and Doctor close the conference door with the bodyguards outside.
The Operative kills Doctor Mathias.
The Operative opens the conference room door. He is holding the bloody sword. The bodyguards draw guns.
The Operative intimidates the guards. “This secret facility is closed. You will never work again if it becomes known that Doctor Mathias died while you were protecting him.”
If you don't like excessive violence, both guards put away their guns. There can be some non-verbal interplay between the guards as they decide money is more important than loyalty or duty... Or one guard puts away his gun and the Operative kills the other guard. Your preference.
The Operative tells a guard, “Treat Doctor Mathias' body with respect. He was a good man. Make it look accidental.” They lock the door on the conference room. The intern returns with tea for the Operative, who then says, “I'll need all the logs on behavioral modification triggers.” The movie continues as before.

I am volunteering to be script doctor for Serenity 2 . I work for free. Just to see the script before production starts is reward enough.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 8:14 PM

That re-write would work well for a Bond movie, I suppose.

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Monday, February 22, 2010 8:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
That re-write would work well for a Bond movie, I suppose.

The laughing Chrisisall

Hurray for me! You must believe I could be a script doctor for Serenity 2 because the last James Bond movie, Quantum of Solace, made $586,090,727 Worldwide. I will not let you down if I get the doctoring job. I promise that because Serenity 2 makes a fortune, it will be immediately followed by a Serenity 3 !!! www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jamesbond22.htm

And Quantum of Solace did not have a happy ending but made money, Money, MONEY, anyway.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 9:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

And Quantum of Solace did not have a happy ending but made money, Money, MONEY, anyway.

LOL, you dolt! MOONRAKER made money, MONEY.

Okay, you're like, nineteen, right? C'mon, right?

The laughing Chrisisall

STEGASAURUS

Monday, February 22, 2010 9:37 PM

Unfortunately, Two, you suffer from the same problem that many movie-goers and fans of certain franchises have: you seem to think you can do a better job of telling a story than the original creator can.

Here's the thing. You can't. It's not your story to tell - it's Joss's, so you'll never tell it better. Everyone that I know that has seen either Firefly or Serenity have either enjoyed or loved the stories. Of course, taking into account that birds of a feather and all that, I realize not everyone will have a positive reaction like those I know, and you seem to fall into that category.

Dislike the story teller/telling if that's your choice, but understand that on the fan sites, you will be little more than an annoyance than an enlightened individual with something important to say.

That's just my 2cp though.

IMNOTHERE

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
Do you believe she really is going to be able to do that after 3 murders?

I think she's going to try really hard to avoid becoming #4. Whether her pants remained dry will remain a mystery because It Wasn't That Sort Of Film.

In other news, "realistically" in every big-box-office action movie that ever was, the entire cast - including the hero - should be in clinical shock before the end of the first reel.

Quote:

The movie changes when Doctor Mathias sarcastically says, “Unfortunately I forgot to bring a sword.”
The Operative replies, “We should continue in private.

Yeah, because that is so more cool than the Op pulling an actual sword just as the doctor finishes that sentence.

Quote:

I have a message from Parliament exclusively for you.” I love sneaky villains.
Doctor Mathias says to the intern, “Bring tea.” etc. etc. etc. waffle. waffle.

Zzzzz...

come on, we haven't even had the credits yet!

Hey! was it you who wrote the "Story So Far" crawl for Star Wars Episode 1?

Quote:

I am volunteering to be script doctor for Serenity 2 .

Methinks not. I was about to say that you might have a promising future as a Fox executive, but I wouldn't stoop quite that low

STORYMARK

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Story, let's say Wash lived, and the broadwaved message destroyed the Alliance Parliament, and our BDH's got medals from the new, freedom & independence-loving government...
Tell me THAT wouldn't have caused more ticket sales.

Happy-happy sells IMO.

The laughing Chrisisall

I highly doubt it. I don't know anyone, whether they had seen the series or not, who was badmouthing the movie as they left. There was no "it's depressing" bad word of mouth problem. It had decent word-of-mouth. And a happy ending doesn't mean a thing if no one is interested enough to show up and see it. That was where the problem lay - there was not enough interest from non-browncoats at the time or release. The ending has nothing to do with that.

Plus, that ending would have been less suspenseful (had Wash lived) and rather silly - the idea of a message instantly destroying an entire government and a blatant Star Wars rip-off to wrap it up. Other than the fan-service of Wash-lives, it would have likely led to poorer word of mouth amongst fans.

Of course, Two's theory is just as off. The opening scene wasn't a problem either, anyone who saw it was already there by then. And I have to question Two's logic, applying his/her own reaction as universal, plus assuming a history or lack of it from the woman in question.

"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."

STORYMARK

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Unfortunately, Two, you suffer from the same problem that many movie-goers and fans of certain franchises have: you seem to think you can do a better job of telling a story than the original creator can.

Here's the thing. You can't.

That assumes infallibility on the part of the original creator, which is blindly fan-ish in and of itself. Take, for instance, that there are many highly lauded professional filmmakers who are Star Wars fans. I have very little doubt that there are at the least, a few who could have written better scripts than the sequels had - given that even Lucas admits he's not much of a writer. Would they have been the stories he wanted to tell - no, but that does not mean they could not have been better.

"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."

STEGASAURUS

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

That assumes infallibility on the part of the original creator, which is blindly fan-ish in and of itself. Take, for instance, that there are many highly lauded professional filmmakers who are Star Wars fans. I have very little doubt that there are at the least, a few who could have written better scripts than the sequels had - given that even Lucas admits he's not much of a writer. Would they have been the stories he wanted to tell - no, but that does not mean they could not have been better.

But then, they wouldn't be THE story, would they? Again, ownership and telling of a story resides soley with the mind who created it, regardless of the story and how well it's presented.

And again, that's just my opinion.

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:

Hey! was it you who wrote the "Story So Far" crawl for Star Wars Episode 1?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Thanks for the biggest LOL of the week!

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 10:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I don't know anyone, whether they had seen the series or not, who was badmouthing the movie as they left. There was no "it's depressing" bad word of mouth problem. It had decent word-of-mouth.

The peeps at the theatre I saw it with on the first day left the building in shell-shocked silence, with the occasional "wow" being muttered.
I contrast that with the smiling & laughing & "That was GREAT"s being vocalized after SW in '77.
However, after reading your post, I'll concede that that was probably not as big a factor as I first conjured.

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Monday, February 22, 2010 11:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
...Dislike the story teller/telling if that's your choice, but understand that on the fan sites, you will be little more than an annoyance than an enlightened individual with something important to say.

That's just my 2cp though.

I can't win, I can't change your minds, but let us fight! I want to die in a blaze of glory, totally surrounded by Reavers who are taking no prisoners. Forget I wrote that. I surrender right now. Notice I'm using “no” frequently. Very negative on my part.

I got this crazy notion that finding no faults with a work of art will encourage the artist to make the same mistakes, again. Superfanboys like “chrisisall” “ImNotHere” and “Stegasaurus” are destructive to Joss Whedon's career. When Joss does something unbelievable ( and I mean that in the bad sense, as in how would anyone but a blockhead believe it ), the unbelievable needs correction. Maybe not what I suggested, but something needs to be done. Or else it drives away ordinary folk. Superfansboys will believe anything. But Joss needs to sell tickets to people who are not over-committed to his legend.

And while I'm at it, the Operative's pinch of death on Doctor Mathias' love handles, is unbelievable. Find me a reference on the internet to a plausible technique for paralyzing Doctor Mathias -- rigid arms, legs, spine, unable to speak. No fair to knock Mathias unconscious and surround him with plaster of paris. The very same technique used on Mathias has to NOT work on Mal because of his moved nerve cluster. What is the name of that nerve cluster? Was it discovered by the anatomist J. Whedon in the 21st Century? If that nerve cluster doesn't have a name and does not do what it did in the movie, it should not have been a major part of the movie. I can accept artificial gravity easily; I can't accept Joss redesigning the human body. Firefly is not X-Men. There are limits that should never be crossed, except in comic books.

I notice that “chrisisall” “ImNotHere” and “Stegasaurus” posted nothing in the Blue Sun Room. Not one damn thing. Very strong indication that you got zero imagination and no ideas. I wait for your murderous replies. I fear you completely.

Now it is your turn to destroy me with superior scorn... [If I was smart, I would not press enter on this response. I'm pushing the button. I hope I survive what is about to happen to me.]

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

CHRISISALL

Monday, February 22, 2010 11:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

Superfanboys like “chrisisall” “ImNotHere” and “Stegasaurus” are destructive to Joss Whedon's career.

Dollhouse wasn't all that.

Try not to faint.

Quote:

I notice that “chrisisall” “ImNotHere” and “Stegasaurus” posted nothing in the Blue Sun Room. Not one damn thing. Very strong indication that you got zero imagination and no ideas.

Can't speak for the others, but in my case you have no idea, LOL.
Interesting, yet pathetic stab.

The laughing Chrisisall

STEGASAURUS

Monday, February 22, 2010 11:49 PM

Agreed, Chrisisall. A pathetic attempt to hurt our feelings and try to win on the interwebz.

Two, honestly I wasn't trying to put forth any attempt to hurt your feelings, nor was I saying you have no imagination. I was simply stating that coming on a fan site and saying "I can do it better!" is not the way to carry on meaningful conversations with the fans that inhabit that society.

Say you have a different take. Say you were disappointed. Say anything you want really, but those statements of superiority over the creator of said fanbase is nothing more than an attempt at sparring with said fans.

I'm sure you're very creative. I'm sure you have amazing literary skills. I might even be tempted to read some of your works. I would just prefer that you not come here and proclaim your kingship of the realm of Firefly. That title rests soley with Joss as far as I am concerned.

G'day, Sir.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 1:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:

I'm sure you're very creative. I'm sure you have amazing literary skills. I might even be tempted to read some of your works. I would just prefer that you not come here and proclaim your kingship of the realm of Firefly. That title rests soley with Joss as far as I am concerned.

Wow Steg, you are SO much a better man than I. I'd stab "Two" given the chance.
Twice.
But politely (and not deep).

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:11 AM

I am so anxious to see that upcoming movie that Two is co-writing with Alex Epstein.

KPO

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:13 AM

Two congratulations, you've fought bravely and occasionally dirtily, and been very entertaining. I too would like to volunteer to be a script doctor on Serenity 2. Unfortunately I would quite likely remove a lot of your changes...

I think the 5 bad points about Serenity that you nailed to the door with Luther-esque zeal are not the reason Serenity 'failed'. I think some are quite minor plot-holes that many will forgive, or not think much of - and some are largely subjective quibbles that firefly fans can argue over long and hard. That's what she said.

My point is a movie either sweeps you away or it doesn't. Star Wars didn't have the marketing budget (initially) to make it a hit: but it also didn't have the polishing that you claim - see this list of 'Star Wars blunders' longer than your 5 theses: http://www.arrowsmithweb.com/index.htm?/starwars.htm

Nevertheless Star Wars managed to capture the public imagination in a way that Serenity (and to be fair, almost every other movie ever made) failed to do. Star Wars was much more epic than Serenity, for a start.

I think Serenity could've been better polished, better marketed - probably enough to score a big enough hit to earn sequels. But I don't think it could ever have been Star Wars - partly because it deals with a more complex and ambivalent evil empire, and partly because the firefly universe was never Joss's 'great idea for a movie' - it just went that route by last resort, with the planned story outline for the whole second series being condensed and adapted for the purpose.

Heads should roll

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
http://www.arrowsmithweb.com/index.htm?/starwars.htm

And Two poops his/her pants in the face Kpo's logic!!! Ha ha

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Two congratulations, you've fought bravely and occasionally dirtily, and been very entertaining. I too would like to volunteer to be a script doctor on Serenity 2. Unfortunately I would quite likely remove a lot of your changes...

I think the 5 bad points about Serenity that you nailed to the door with Luther-esque zeal are not the reason Serenity 'failed'. I think some are quite minor plot-holes that many will forgive, or not think much of - and some are largely subjective quibbles that firefly fans can argue over long and hard. That's what she said.

My point is a movie either sweeps you away or it doesn't. Star Wars didn't have the marketing budget (initially) to make it a hit: but it also didn't have the polishing that you claim - see this list of 'Star Wars blunders' longer than your 5 theses: http://www.arrowsmithweb.com/index.htm?/starwars.htm

Nevertheless Star Wars managed to capture the public imagination in a way that Serenity (and to be fair, almost every other movie ever made) failed to do. Star Wars was much more epic than Serenity, for a start.

I think Serenity could've been better polished, better marketed - probably enough to score a big enough hit to earn sequels. But I don't think it could ever have been Star Wars - partly because it deals with a more complex and ambivalent evil empire, and partly because the firefly universe was never Joss's 'great idea for a movie' - it just went that route by last resort, with the planned story outline for the whole second series being condensed and adapted for the purpose.

Heads should roll

Thanks for the list of StarWars Blunders. It is like a list of faults in “Toy Story”: 1) How can Woody possibly talk without pulling his own string? 2) How can Buzz Lightyear not know he can't fly and his laser can't fire? 3)...

When I saw StarWars for the first time, it was a Saturday morning matinee like George Lucas went to as a kid. I never took anything in StarWars as remotely possible. Light-sabers, galactic empire, protocol robots, 3D chess, DeathStar, faster-than-light-speed, everything, it was never real. It was a tale of wonder and magic that allowed Lucas to get away with anything if he did it with style. Everything can be believable in a fairy tale because none of it is real.

On the other hand, Firefly was completely real, never a fairytale. And also very believable, exactly like StarWars.

Firefly, and most TV doctor shows, cop shows, The Wire, Breaking Bad are aiming for verisimilitude. Unfortunately, Serenity has a dozen odd spots where for a minute it stops being as realistic as Firefly. And Serenity stops being believable for a minute. Audiences notice those minutes. Popcorn falls from our open mouths into our laps. We are stunned. Did an alternate Universe suddenly intrude into the AMC Gulf Pointe 30 for a minute? That is discombobulating.

Serenity ended up somewhere in no-man's land between realistic Firefly and fairytale StarWars. A poor place for a spaceship movie to earn money.

With real human bodies, some things are very hard to believe: The Operative's pinch of death on Dr Mathias is pure “Chobits” www.imdb.com/title/tt0326672/ where robots have switches to paralyze them. I very patiently wait for a wise guy to tell me the anatomical name of that nerve cluster the Operative pinches. I have waited for years. If it doesn't really exist, the paralyzing switch idea should have stayed over at Chobits. If it does exist, well... I owe everybody in the 'Verse a round of drinks. A&W Root Beer for everyone!

The less written about the Operative's sword deep in Mal's guts (or shallowly grazing his blubber) the better. Joss tried to fix that in editing by picking different shots.

Jayne walked around on a leg that was harpooned. Whiskey and a rag bandage fixes Jayne's leg? Does the filthy rag smell like it was dipped in bullshit? That stink can't be good for ticket sales.

And Mal turning his back twice on the Operative? The first time was a tactical error. The se

ECGORDON

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
On the other hand, Firefly was completely real, never a fairytale.

Ermm...it wasn't real, it was a tv show. What fantasy world are you living in?

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

That assumes infallibility on the part of the original creator, which is blindly fan-ish in and of itself. Take, for instance, that there are many highly lauded professional filmmakers who are Star Wars fans. I have very little doubt that there are at the least, a few who could have written better scripts than the sequels had - given that even Lucas admits he's not much of a writer. Would they have been the stories he wanted to tell - no, but that does not mean they could not have been better.

But then, they wouldn't be THE story, would they? Again, ownership and telling of a story resides soley with the mind who created it, regardless of the story and how well it's presented.

And again, that's just my opinion.

Such a narrow view. Who says there is a "The" story? Besides, I never commented on that concept - just pointing out that the creator doesn't have a monopoly of telling a good story.

Take for instance comic books - the "classic" stories of virtually any given character were done by people other than the creators. Does that invalidate them as stories?

Or flip the concept - should Joss never work on a story that didn't originate with him? He's done it many times in the past, but that was okay, right?

You may really believe what you said, but as a notion it's highly unrealistic and quite narrow in scope.

"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."

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I don't know anyone, whether they had seen the series or not, who was badmouthing the movie as they left. There was no "it's depressing" bad word of mouth problem. It had decent word-of-mouth.
The peeps at the theatre I saw it with on the first day left the building in shell-shocked silence, with the occasional "wow" being muttered.
I contrast that with the smiling & laughing & "That was GREAT"s being vocalized after SW in '77.
However, after reading your post, I'll concede that that was probably not as big a factor as I first conjured.

The laughing Chrisisall

That is exactly how I and my friends walked out of the theatre - but that doesn't for a split second mean we didn't love it.

I've walked out of many films I loved in a state of shock. Sometimes it takes a while for the mind to process, particularly when dealing with a film that ends with a 25-minute adrenaline surge mixed with an emotional gut-punch.

those movies that people stumble out of the theatre babbling about are the fast food ones that folks forget by the time they leave the parking lot.

"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."

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

I notice that “chrisisall” “ImNotHere” and “Stegasaurus” posted nothing in the Blue Sun Room. Not one damn thing. Very strong indication that you got zero imagination and no ideas. I wait for your murderous replies. I fear you completely.

Not writing fan fic is an indication of a lack of creativity....?

Hey, here's a thought, maybe using some else's characters and setting isn't exactly "creative".

I think you need to look into the superfanboy mirror.

Quote:
Now it is your turn to destroy me with superior scorn... [If I was smart, I would not press enter on this response. I'm pushing the button. I hope I survive what is about to happen to me.]

You know, you were kinda amusing when you started off. Now you're just being a massive douchebag.

And your "Firefly is the real world" comment..... whoah.

"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."

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

That is exactly how I and my friends walked out of the theatre - but that doesn't for a split second mean we didn't love it.

Oh, everyone loved it, or almost everyone at any rate. It was *good* shock.

The laughing Chrisisall

STEGASAURUS

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 7:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Such a narrow view. Who says there is a "The" story? Besides, I never commented on that concept - just pointing out that the creator doesn't have a monopoly of telling a good story.

Who says there is "The" story? Um, the creator of said story? I'm not saying folk can't create their own versions of a story, I'm just of the opinion that any deviation to the story changes said story and thus is not the same as the original concept.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Take for instance comic books - the "classic" stories of virtually any given character were done by people other than the creators. Does that invalidate them as stories?

Not at all. The story hasn't been told yet, or is a continuation, or is an alternate univers storyline. Very rarely do you see anyone go back and rewrite the story from the original telling and proclaim their's is better. When it does happen, you usually see the die-hard fans crying foul or just enjoying their next installment. There's all sorts of folk.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Or flip the concept - should Joss never work on a story that didn't originate with him? He's done it many times in the past, but that was okay, right?

Even if a story told by Joss was a rehash of a story done before, because it's being done in the Whedon-verse, it's a new telling of a new story simply because the characters are there. But I think you're missing my original point.

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
You may really believe what you said, but as a notion it's highly unrealistic and quite narrow in scope.

The "notion" as you put it is my opinion. Of course it's narrow in scope. It applies to me and my thoughts/feelings/beliefs, and I never for one second thought anyone here shared them in whole.

Alow me to try to get this back on track though. I have an issue with Two coming on here and stating that sales were bad because of the story and he could have done it better. My reasoning and disdain for his statement is simply because we could never know if he really could.

Past that, anything he comes up with as "better" is simply a re-write of a story that was just fine as is. Especially according to the majority denizens of this message board. We wanted more Firefly, we got Serenity, and we were reasonably happy. For Two to came here and attempt to illicit some form of argument by his/her statements seems like a blatant attempt to rile our population here.

As I stated before, I am sure that to some degree Two is creative and I might actually enjoy their work. But again, I can look at the rewrites or fresh works individually apart from the orginal work and still derive some enjoyment from it (if it's done well). But I would not support a statement of them having done "better" than the original story teller, especially if I already thoroughly enjoyed the original.

On another board I visit, there are several nay-sayers about SGU. They are die-hard fans of SG-1 and SG:A, so they have felt slighted by SGU and it's "different-ness". As I have told them: like it or don't. Your opinion is just as valuable as mine and state it if you like. But don't tell me that the writers/creators are wrong in any sense of the telling of the story. You may have built a kinship or fondness of the characters of your beloved shows, but the creators CREATED them. It's their story to tell.

Ok, I'm just kinda ramblin' here as I'm working while typing. If there's anything I've stated that is at all unclear, I apologize but you are more than welcome to PM me for clarification.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 8:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Who says there is "The" story? Um, the creator of said story? I'm not saying folk can't create their own versions of a story, I'm just of the opinion that any deviation to the story changes said story and thus is not the same as the original concept.

Again, such a narrow view. The original writers change their course many time, thus it's not the "original concept".

They also often hand over their creations to others, sometimes guiding the story, others not. Is it then not the real story?

Or, to keep it strictly to re-writes, as that's where this started in regards to Serenity - Joss has done many rewrites. Was he violating Graham Yosts original story when he rewrote Speed?

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Take for instance comic books - the "classic" stories of virtually any given character were done by people other than the creators. Does that invalidate them as stories?

Quote:

Not at all. The story hasn't been told yet, or is a continuation, or is an alternate univers storyline.

You're not being very consistent here then. If another writer had taken on the latter Star Wars movies, how would that not be a continuation? Or if someone else were to take over Firefly.... a continuation.

Quote:
Very rarely do you see anyone go back and rewrite the story from the original telling and proclaim their's is better. When it does happen, you usually see the die-hard fans crying foul or just enjoying their next installment. There's all sorts of folk.

Actually - in comics, where my point began - yeah, that does happen pretty frequently. How well people accept it depends entirely on how good the story is - not fidelity to the creator's vision.

Quote:

Even if a story told by Joss was a rehash of a story done before, because it's being done in the Whedon-verse, it's a new telling of a new story simply because the characters are there. But I think you're missing my original point.

So, it's not okay for other writers to take a stab at someone else's story or characters.... but it IS okay for Joss?

Your point seems to boil down to: If it's Joss, he can do whatever he wants.

But if I'm missing your real point, please clarify.

Quote:

The "notion" as you put it is my opinion. Of course it's narrow in scope. It applies to me and my thoughts/feelings/beliefs, and I never for one second thought anyone here shared them in whole.

I meant narrow minded - of course I don't ascribe your opinion to others. but it's a rather narrow-minded opinion (and rather inconsistent in it's application).

Quote:
Alow me to try to get this back on track though. I have an issue with Two coming on here and stating that sales were bad because of the story and he could have done it better. My reasoning and disdain for his statement is simply because we could never know if he really could.

I also think Two had some pretty faulty logic going - but you refuted him with equally flawed logic. I pointed this error out in the same way you did to two - though I've tried to keep it on an intellectual level rather than personal as you seem to be.

Quote:
Past that, anything he comes up with as "better" is simply a re-write of a story that was just fine as is. Especially according to the majority denizens of this message board.

There are many fans who disliked things about the film. Opinion is opinion, and everyone has a right to share theirs, even Two.

Quote:
We wanted more Firefly, we got Serenity, and we were reasonably happy. For Two to came here and attempt to illicit some form of argument by his/her statements seems like a blatant attempt to rile our population here.

seemed like a genuine attempt at analyzing the story. I may not agree with the conclusions he came to, but that doesn't mean it's not worth analyzing.

And no one forced you to get into it, if you found it so inflammatory.

[quote

STEGASAURUS

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:35 PM

You're wandering off the mark again there, Story.

Allow me to once again put into perspective MY views in regards to the story and story-teller: It's not A story until it's been presented to me.

Does that make more sense to you? Any adjustments to a story have no bearing to me until the story's been told. The story of Speed was as was presented to me at the theater. Serenity's story is as was presented to me at the theater. Any changes pre- and post-production are moot. Those changes aren't the story. The story is and always will be as presented to me in the form of entertainment I take them in.

You accuse me of being narrow minded, but then how could my narrow mindedness possibly cope with stories like say Smallville? Especially when I thoroughly enjoy that series?

I'm not narrow minded, I simply seem to have a problem conveying my views well in a literary sense. Prolly why I'm not a novelist or screen writer.

And please understand while I do enjoy Joss's work, I absolutely believe someone else could come along and write/produce a continuation of his conceptual story. But I don't believe anyone could rewrite Serenity to make it any better, because the story has already been told to me.

That, of course, does not take into account the changes in the medium in which the story is told. A remake that stays true to the original but has better effects I never have a problem with. But again, for me, that does not make it better.

At this point, I don't think I've taken any personal stabs at anyone here, unlike you and Two. I've merely tried to point out that to come on a message board inhabited by fans (remember, fans is a shortened form of fanatics) of said story teller and claiming to do it better is not the smartest decision to make if you are trying to garner kudos for your attempt at rewriting the established works. Instead, present your views and remember that not everyone will share your view.

If anything, I would think that you have taken my comments more personnally than Two did. You seem to want to proclaim I'm wrong about something, but who are you to tell me that what I feel and think in regards to my ability to absorb information is wrong? Really you're just another anonmous name on a message board, nothing more.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings with any of my earlier postings, and I'm sorry if I have been in any way unclear in my ramblings. They tend to make sense to me. *shrug*

IMNOTHERE

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

Serenity is perfect except for those few odd spots where it becomes unreal.

So lets get this straight: you worry about the intern's ability to open a filing cabinet after witnessing a murder, the "nerve pinch" thing, Jayne's leg wound and other trivia destroying the "verisimilitude" of the film, yet little details like (deep breath):

an (initially) unarmed 15 year-old girl single-handedly fighting off a zombie army, ravening zombies who can fly spaceships, an entire Earthlike world being "forgotten", a hacker with (apparently) a planet full of giant comms gear to himself, a giant solar system whose planets appear to be fixed like islands in an ocean, spaceships that can cross a solar system in days (powered by an engine made out of old washing machine parts and maintained by a totally untrained young woman who "just has a knack for machines") but, when they cross paths, appear to have relative velocities of about 10 knots, FTL communications (just as impossible as FTL travel according to current physics), typical Hollywood fight sequences where the hero gets beaten to the verge of death before suddenly turning the tables and a universe where everybody dresses and talks like they lived in the 19th century...

...are "realistic". WTF?

Now, if Serenity/Firefly claimed to be "based on a true story" or made a big fuss of having scientific consultants from NASA I'd happily whale on it over all of the above (and, maybe, some of your points). But its not - its just as much fantasy and allegory as Buffy, so my disbelief is willingly suspended.

The other point that you are missing, going back to your original issue about editing, is that that sort of "creativity by the numbers" is a reliable way of making mediocre films. Its a good starting point, but the editors that will go places are the ones that know when to dump the rules. For my money, the earlier parts of "Serenity", the sigue from the Universal logo, through the school lesson, to River's rescue, the introduction of the Operative and the tour of the ship - are one of the most distinctive and impressive parts of the movie. If I was going to start second guessing, I'd tone down the whole "River the Zombie Slayer" angle.

Of course, if you've got Tom Cruise on board, a cross-promotion deal with McDonalds or such an astronomical budget that the press are devoting column-yards to speculating whether you're going to bankrupt the studios or whether your ex-wife is going to beat you to the Oscar... well, then you can get away with painting by numbers.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

There are many fans who disliked things about the film. Opinion is opinion, and everyone has a right to share theirs, even Two.

I have decided that Two's opinion is not worthy of sharing with us due to his/her innate hatred of Serenity. Two may appeal to me in writing if he/she wishes.

And Story, all Steg is saying really is that Two did not create Firefly, nor was he/she hired to write Serenity, so that gives him/her ZERO final say in the matter, beyond his/her own THEORIES in the matter of it's storytelling or lack thereof, which he/she is presenting as stone cold FACT.

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:44 PM

Am I wrong in assuming that the consensus opinion is that Two, James Cutting and Alex Epstein are wrong and the rest of us who love Serenity just the way it is are right?

Which is it?

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

STEGASAURUS

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
And Story, all Steg is saying really is that Two did not create Firefly, nor was he/she hired to write Serenity, so that gives him/her ZERO final say in the matter, beyond his/her own THEORIES in the matter of it's storytelling or lack thereof, which he/she is presenting as stone cold FACT.

^ That.

I knew SOMEONE got what I was trying to say, however ineloquently I was saying it.

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:

an (initially) unarmed 15 year-old girl single-handedly fighting off a zombie army, ravening zombies who can fly spaceships, an entire Earthlike world being "forgotten", a hacker with (apparently) a planet full of giant comms gear to himself, a giant solar system whose planets appear to be fixed like islands in an ocean, spaceships that can cross a solar system in days (powered by an engine made out of old washing machine parts and maintained by a totally untrained young woman who "just has a knack for machines") but, when they cross paths, appear to have relative velocities of about 10 knots, FTL communications (just as impossible as FTL travel according to current physics), typical Hollywood fight sequences where the hero gets beaten to the verge of death before suddenly turning the tables and a universe where everybody dresses and talks like they lived in the 19th century...

...are "realistic". WTF?

ImNot, none of that bothers me, BUT that line in Out Of Gas about "somethin' must have been livin' in here..."
I mean, doesn't Serenity (or ANY spaceship) go rather hermetic when the doors are shut? How exactly could anything get in, or live for long without food & water? The salesman ain't like to leave ships doors open nor unlocked- that'd invite thievery.
That one little *unrealistic* detail made the series unwatchable, and caused FF's cancellation!

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Am I wrong in assuming that the consensus opinion is that Two, James Cutting and Alex Epstein are wrong and the rest of us who love Serenity just the way it is are right?

Which is it?

As in any realm there are valid points to be made all around, it's rarely a balls-out either-or scenario.
But yeah, we're more right.

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 9:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:

an (initially) unarmed 15 year-old girl single-handedly fighting off a zombie army, ravening zombies who can fly spaceships, an entire Earthlike world being "forgotten", a hacker with (apparently) a planet full of giant comms gear to himself, a giant solar system whose planets appear to be fixed like islands in an ocean, spaceships that can cross a solar system in days (powered by an engine made out of old washing machine parts and maintained by a totally untrained young woman who "just has a knack for machines") but, when they cross paths, appear to have relative velocities of about 10 knots, FTL communications (just as impossible as FTL travel according to current physics), typical Hollywood fight sequences where the hero gets beaten to the verge of death before suddenly turning the tables and a universe where everybody dresses and talks like they lived in the 19th century...

...are "realistic". WTF?

ImNot, none of that bothers me, BUT that line in Out Of Gas about "somethin' must have been livin' in here..."
I mean, doesn't Serenity (or ANY spaceship) go rather hermetic when the doors are shut? How exactly could anything get in, or live for long without food & water? The salesman ain't like to leave ships doors open nor unlocked- that'd invite thievery.
That one little *unrealistic* detail made the series unwatchable, and caused FF's cancellation!

The laughing Chrisisall

No, no, no. It was the lighting cable being drawn across the floor by the key grip in that scene that took me right out of the story. Might as well have been a boom mike in the shot. I stopped watching Firefly at that point and refuse to watch it or Serenity ever again!!!

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
And Story, all Steg is saying really is that Two did not create Firefly, nor was he/she hired to write Serenity, so that gives him/her ZERO final say in the matter, beyond his/her own THEORIES in the matter of it's storytelling or lack thereof, which he/she is presenting as stone cold FACT.

^ That.

I knew SOMEONE got what I was trying to say, however ineloquently I was saying it.

Fair enough.

Sorry if I got too into the debate. Debating movies for me is like politics for most folk. Just ask Chris.

"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."

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Stegasaurus:
You're wandering off the mark again there, Story.

Allow me to once again put into perspective MY views in regards to the story and story-teller: It's not A story until it's been presented to me.

Does that make more sense to you? Any adjustments to a story have no bearing to me until the story's been told. The story of Speed was as was presented to me at the theater. Serenity's story is as was presented to me at the theater. Any changes pre- and post-production are moot. Those changes aren't the story.

Okay, well I see the disconnect then, as since we were talking about changes to Serenity - which is of course already presented as you put it - I thought we were talking about a hypothetical.

OF COURSE no one should change it then, but had someone rewritten the script, before it had been presented (as was my point with the Star Wars movies) then it would still be perfectly valid as "the" story.

To be honest though, I still don't really see what you were getting at, as your arguments are rather contradictory - other than telling Two to shove it, essentially.

"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."

CHRISISALL

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Debating movies for me is like politics for most folk. Just ask Chris.

Wanna go on Blade Runner agin?

The laughing Chrisisall

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:18 PM

But we both love it, right?

Or did we get into it over the narration? I forget....

"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."

IMNOTHERE

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
ImNot, none of that bothers me, BUT that line in Out Of Gas about "somethin' must have been livin' in here..."

Actually, the real reason that Serenity failed was that people were offended by that line about Kaylee's use of battery-powered devices. I can provide eye-witness evidence from when I saw the film in the cinema that at least 2 people walked out after that line.

(Unless they just went to the bathroom).

STEGASAURUS

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
To be honest though, I still don't really see what you were getting at, as your arguments are rather contradictory - other than telling Two to shove it, essentially."

My problem is that while I'm trying to disprove/dispell/diswhatever an individual in a forum, I do my best to try to let them know that I am not attacking them personally, so I will throw in what I may agree with coupled with my personal feelings and experiences. This tends to make my posts a semi-difficult read, admittedly.

What Chrisisall posted was the core of my point.

STORYMARK

Tuesday, February 23, 2010 10:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
ImNot, none of that bothers me, BUT that line in Out Of Gas about "somethin' must have been livin' in here..."

Actually, the real reason that Serenity failed was that people were offended by that line about Kaylee's use of battery-powered devices. I can provide eye-witness evidence from when I saw the film in the cinema that at least 2 people walked out after that line.

(Unless they just went to the bathroom).

If they were guys, maybe they were off to their bunks....

"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."

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:00 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Or did we get into it over the narration? I forget....

To narrate or not to narrate, that is the question.

The laughing Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Or did we get into it over the narration? I forget....

To narrate or not to narrate, that is the question.

The laughing Chrisisall

And the answer is NOT.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Or did we get into it over the narration? I forget....

To narrate or not to narrate, that is the question.

The laughing Chrisisall

And the answer is NOT.

The movie was *DESIGNED* around a narration, in fact over an hours worth was recorded- the fact that they wrote what they ended up using in one quick shot near the end of principle photography should not make peeps dismiss the narration altogether. Ford conspired with Scott to eliminate it at the last minute, thinkng to make it more "artsy," a big mistake IMO, and in the opinion of the producers. I *usually* never side with the suits, but in this ONE instance, it was a good call.
Yeah, the narration could have been better, but what got slapped on was sufficient to evoke the mood originally intended.
Wanna fight?

The laughing Chrisisall

KPO

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:52 AM

Quote:
On the other hand, Firefly was completely real, never a fairytale. And also very believable, exactly like StarWars.

I think I know what you're saying, different programmes/movies have different standards of realism. I wouldn't say Firefly was 'completely' real; just considering something like character dialogue in the firefly universe - though I love it - it's not quite how people speak in real life.

And I wouldn't compare Firefly to The Wire, a show that aims for greater realism in this kind of respect.

All in all I think you have a point or two about a few glitches in Serenity, perhaps worse than in Firefly. And I liked your analogy about chauffering Joss Whedon's child 'Serenity'. I personally think Joss Whedon's other child 'Firefly', whose life was tragically cut short, was the real beauty of the family (regardless of minor fashion faux-paux on the parts of either, hats etc.). I love Serenity, who is beautiful in her own right, but part of my love for her is a carry-over of my love of her sister Firefly, whom she reminds me of.

Of course it's subjective. Some people will think Serenity is the real beauty, or just a wonderful *maturation* of little Firefly for the big screen.

I might check out this 190 page script - but I have my doubts that it is impeccably better, and I happen to be one of those people who thought it was good for the tension of the movie that Wash *did* die...

Heads should roll

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 3:33 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
I happen to be one of those people who thought it was good for the tension of the movie that Wash *did* die...

Just to say, I *personally* would not have had that happen, but then, I am not the God of that 'Verse.

The laughing Chrisisall

JONGSSTRAW

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 12:19 PM

I think the reasons the movie failed at the box office were quite simple. No one knew what the hell Serenity was, who these people were, and what they were all about doing. Sure Browncoats knew the characters and the background, but no one else did. To BC's the movie was huge, to others it was merely a strange movie about a place and circumstances that the general public would not have a clue about, or relate to in any connective way. Although certain aspects of the movie could be considered "epic" by BC's, the mass audience would have considered the movie to be rather "small" in scope and limited in scale compared to previous blockbusters. Also, the characters and dialogue that were oh so wonderful for us to see and hear, would have gone totally un-appreciated and unknown by a new audience hearing and seeing it all for the first time. And let's face it, the BDM is rather a depressing presentation. The attempt at turning our generally easy-going and likeable heroes into serious characters with angst and bitterness was a turn-off for many. One did not walk out of the theater feeling good or cheering about anything.

TWO

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 1:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Quote:
On the other hand, Firefly was completely real, never a fairytale. And also very believable, exactly like StarWars.

I think I know what you're saying, different programmes/movies have different standards of realism. I wouldn't say Firefly was 'completely' real; just considering something like character dialogue in the firefly universe - though I love it - it's not quite how people speak in real life.

And I wouldn't compare Firefly to The Wire, a show that aims for greater realism in this kind of respect.

All in all I think you have a point or two about a few glitches in Serenity, perhaps worse than in Firefly. And I liked your analogy about chauffering Joss Whedon's child 'Serenity'. I personally think Joss Whedon's other child 'Firefly', whose life was tragically cut short, was the real beauty of the family (regardless of minor fashion faux-paux on the parts of either, hats etc.). I love Serenity, who is beautiful in her own right, but part of my love for her is a carry-over of my love of her sister Firefly, whom she reminds me of.

Of course it's subjective. Some people will think Serenity is the real beauty, or just a wonderful *maturation* of little Firefly for the big screen.

I might check out this 190 page script - but I have my doubts that it is impeccably better, and I happen to be one of those people who thought it was good for the tension of the movie that Wash *did* die...

The 190 page screenplay solved some problems in the 126 page screenplay.

I'm pimping the idea that Joss Whedon killed Wash so that he could be resurrected in a sequel. The short story by kieyra, Indistinguishable from Magic, sketches out how that would be done. www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=5185

“I like this so much I wish we could see it happen in the next gorram movie,” commented Amdobell.

*~* Spoiler for Indistinguishable from Magic *~*
There is a little problem with that particular story. It is not that it violates physics; it is that the story violates what I think/know about human nature. The Alliance designs a time machine and never uses it. I can not swallow that as easily as I can the existence of a time machine that Kaylee builds from plans River stole. Do you want to know what the main problem is when writing a genre story? How preposterous can a story get before people turn away in disbelief.

If you go too far, the story is ruined in the opinion of the stodgier people. If you don't go far enough, the story is a bore for the rest. It happens all the time -- half the audience is bewildered in one part of a movie, the other half is bored in another part, leaving a story that people feel lukewarm about. (It is possible to have a time machine in a mainstream movie: Deja Vu with Denzel Washington is one example. I'm saying the Time Traveler's Daughter is another, even if there is no actual machine with blinking lights.)

As always, children and nerds are easier to please than adults who expect more from movies. That's the real reason why more movie tickets are sold to the young than the old.

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

RAHLMACLAREN

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 3:55 PM

Quote:
1) Jayne walking on his leg after being speared by Reavers. Myriam, who spent a week in the hospital after breaking a bone there, said she couldn't believe it.

Mal: "...you do your job. Patch up my crew..."
Simon's a really good doctor. Duh!

Quote:
2) The Operative's pinch of death on Doctor Mathias' love-handle. That pinch doesn't exist because nobody's body works like that, unless they are aliens.

Have someone you know knock one of your vertibrae out of place and see how that feels.

Quote:
3) Mal's quick-draw on the Operative: Afterward, why did Mal turn his back on the Operative? Why not kill the Op immediately?

'Cause then the Op wouldn't have be alive to tell the solders to stand down. Even with the "better" ending you have linked.

Quote:
4) Jayne's drunken plan to put River on the shuttle. Who would believe that the shuttle will be able to speed away faster than Serenity can follow?

Jayne just started drinking, he wouldn't have been drunk yet. Jayne isn't known to be a great thinker.

Passion Rules Reason.

Quote:
5) Once the Alliance had their guns on River, the story ended 30 seconds later. It can't end now! That's too rushed! It needed to be stretched out another minute because this is the best part of the movie.

Save some of that for the sequel! Besides, the battle was already pretty drawn out at this point.

--------------------------------------------------
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 5:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

As always, children and nerds are easier to please than adults who expect more from movies.

Don't be such a prig.

The laughing Chrisisall

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Or did we get into it over the narration? I forget....

To narrate or not to narrate, that is the question.

The laughing Chrisisall

And the answer is NOT.

The movie was *DESIGNED* around a narration, in fact over an hours worth was recorded- the fact that they wrote what they ended up using in one quick shot near the end of principle photography should not make peeps dismiss the narration altogether. Ford conspired with Scott to eliminate it at the last minute, thinkng to make it more "artsy," a big mistake IMO, and in the opinion of the producers. I *usually* never side with the suits, but in this ONE instance, it was a good call.
Yeah, the narration could have been better, but what got slapped on was sufficient to evoke the mood originally intended.
Wanna fight?

The laughing Chrisisall

Well, most fans of the film, and EVERYONE who worked on it, prefer it gone. Sorry.

It may have been designed for it (though I question that), but that doesn't mean it was a good idea or worked. That's why there is a post-production process - to refine the film, and sometimes ditch things they planned on that didn't work the way they wanted.

"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."

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
I happen to be one of those people who thought it was good for the tension of the movie that Wash *did* die...
l

Absolutely agree. Once that happened - I was convinced they were ALL going to die. It made the ending one of the most intense viewing experiences I've ever had. If wash had lived, there would have been none of that, it would have been just another shoot-out and fistfight.

Sure, it hurt to loose Wash - but it was supposed to. Joss is a smart man, he know just what to do to kick the ending into high gear.

"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."

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 24, 2010 7:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:

As always, children and nerds are easier to please than adults who expect more from movies. That's the real reason why more movie tickets are sold to the young than the old.

And the true mark of a lousy amateur writer is when they throw tantrums and toss insults when people don't like their story..... or in this case, their heavy-handed insistence on their own (un-evidenced) brilliance.

"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."

ECGORDON

Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by two:
As always, children and nerds are easier to please than adults who expect more from movies. That's the real reason why more movie tickets are sold to the young than the old.

That's because most Hollywood movies aren't mature enough to appeal to discerning adults, but Serenity was. I would much rather have Serenity just the way it is rather than Joss compromising to appeal to nerdy ticket buyers.

And as for Wash's death, don't forget what the definition of a hero is.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

CHRISISALL

Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Well, most fans of the film

Name them.

Quote:
and EVERYONE who worked on it

Not EVERYONE, clearly

Quote:
prefer it gone. Sorry.

Don't be sorry, just accept that many prefer the narration.

Quote:

It may have been designed for it (though I question that)

With over an hours worth of recorded narration???

Quote:
but that doesn't mean it was a good idea or worked. That's why there is a post-production process - to refine the film, and sometimes ditch things they planned on that didn't work the way they wanted.

IMO, that was Ridley's indulgent phase, when he thought he could do no wrong by jettisoning the screenwriter's intent & go more Worhol with the project. Look at his next one where he went too far the other way (Legend).

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Thursday, February 25, 2010 1:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:

Absolutely agree. Once that happened - I was convinced they were ALL going to die. It made the ending one of the most intense viewing experiences I've ever had.

Totally. I was never so thrashed by a movie before. I felt like a wet dish-rag after. Even more than after The Empire Strikes Back.

The laughing Chrisisall

CHRISISALL

Thursday, February 25, 2010 2:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:
most Hollywood movies aren't mature enough to appeal to discerning adults, but Serenity was. I would much rather have Serenity just the way it is rather than Joss compromising to appeal to nerdy ticket buyers.

My man!

The laughing Chrisisall

TWO

Thursday, February 25, 2010 8:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Quote:
Originally posted by two:

As always, children and nerds are easier to please than adults who expect more from movies.
Don't be such a prig.

The laughing Chrisisall

I would have said to me: "Two, you're arrogant. You think you're better than us?" That sounds Badger-esque. For extra pungency, maybe I would imply violence against two.

I have decided not to wear my nerdy name-tag that says, "Hi! My Name Is two." I'd be in danger at Comic-Con. I will be proudly wearing the Jayne hat with my pompom held high, should you want to talk to me in person.

Not two ↓

Not two ↑

The Joss Whedon script for "Serenity", where Wash lives, is
Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/two

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE