Patrick Rothfuss and the campaign to buy Firefly rights.

POSTED BY: chapterandverse
UPDATED: Friday, February 25, 2011 23:45
VIEWED: 11747
PAGE 2 of 3

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
You don't want to take my word for it, fine, but there's a reason you hear it repeated so often.

Just because its said a lot doesn't make it true. The fact that I cannot find anything to back that up about Firefly or ANY Fox show, tends to make me doubtful. In fact, after doing several searches, I can find nothing at all that indicates the 10 year timeframe is legitimate. Every instance I find is either from this board, or another site referencing a conversation here.

It's not about taking your word, there are plenty of people saying it, obviously. But repetition doesn't equate with fact, and I'm a "show me the source" kinda guy.

I think it's a rumor that fans latched onto because it offered a glimmer of hope. It's a nice thought, but that hardly makes it factual.

Which isn't a new theory either, I found a post from this site 6 years ago:

Quote:
According to an interview on Zap2It, Joss said: "My relationship with the network is not so great, but my deal is with television production, and we've had a good relationship for years." There were some other interviews with Joss where he elaborates, which I can't find at the moment, but this just means that as long as Fox's rights are enforceable (not expired), Joss cannot bring Firefly (among other things) back to television production without Fox's consent. (Which leads to the dissolution of Mutant Enemy, triggering mass speculation on strategy and possible legal loop-holes.)

That fact, combined with the hope for a trilogy, lead people to guess that it would take about 10 years to make 3 full movies, which translates to them as Fox's rights expire in 10 years' time. Again, these are just fan guesses based on things they've heard and read from cast members' vague statements and other, far less reliable places. To the best of my recollection, I have never heard that 10 year guesstimate to be confirmed by Joss, Buchanan or anyone else possessing intimate knowledge of the contracts.

Nothing seems to have changed in the time since. Lots of speculation about 10 years - no real evidence.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:47 PM

Er? If that's true, where it came from makes no logical sense. The end of the movie rights would have nothing to do with the end of the television rights, and there's no way anyone could pin that down as "ten years" anyway.

Perhaps the number was dreamed up by fan speculation, but it's weird they would be quoting a concrete number if there was no basis to it.

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:51 PM

The contract agreement is what I heard from Whedonesque, but it was in the comments. I heard it often enough from different commenters on different thread topics I assumed it was true.

I don't think we know that it's false though either until Joss or Buchanan debunks it (or time kicks us in the ass and Fox still has the rights).

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Er? If that's true, where it came from makes no logical sense. The end of the movie rights would have nothing to do with the end of the television rights, and there's no way anyone could pin that down as "ten years" anyway.

Actually, in theory, they could. The film and TV rights could have entirely different criteria.

But you misunderstood the point - there was no mention of expiring movie rights, the 10 year timeframe in that context was the assumed time needed for production and turn around (following the standard 3 year gap between installments).

"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 23, 2011 10:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:

I don't think we know that it's false though either until Joss or Buchanan debunks it (or time kicks us in the ass and Fox still has the rights).

True, in a very literal sense. But that again strikes me as wishful thinking over reason. Believing in something with no evidence, until proof of non-existence arrives is a system generally reserved for religion. And I love Firefly.... but I don't worship it.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:27 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Er? If that's true, where it came from makes no logical sense. The end of the movie rights would have nothing to do with the end of the television rights, and there's no way anyone could pin that down as "ten years" anyway.

Actually, in theory, they could. The film and TV rights could have entirely different criteria.

But you misunderstood the point - there was no mention of expiring movie rights, the 10 year timeframe in that context was the assumed time needed for production and turn around (following the standard 3 year gap between installments).

No I didn't. Three movies was all that was supposedly contracted for, meaning the movie rights would have expired after three movies. Once the movie rights expired, Fox or whoever would have theoretically been free to (re)start production on the television series.

What my point was that it makes no sense to say that translates to when the TELEVISION rights expire, which according to the article, is what people were doing.

STORYMARK

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 10:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Er? If that's true, where it came from makes no logical sense. The end of the movie rights would have nothing to do with the end of the television rights, and there's no way anyone could pin that down as "ten years" anyway.

Actually, in theory, they could. The film and TV rights could have entirely different criteria.

But you misunderstood the point - there was no mention of expiring movie rights, the 10 year timeframe in that context was the assumed time needed for production and turn around (following the standard 3 year gap between installments).

No I didn't. Three movies was all that was supposedly contracted for, meaning the movie rights would have expired after three movies. What my point was that it makes no sense to say that translates to when the TELEVISION rights expire, which according to the article, is what people were doing.

Telephone game. Rumors pass, and morph as they go. Thought that was obvious.

"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."

BYTEMITE

Wednesday, February 23, 2011 11:51 PM

Maybe, maybe not. There's actually no reason to say "a trilogy? that will take ten years." So my question is still where the ten years thing comes from.

STORYMARK

Thursday, February 24, 2011 12:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
There's actually no reason to say "a trilogy? that will take ten years." So my question is still where the ten years thing comes from.

At the time, the average turn around between sequels was 3 years. It tends to be faster now, but that's usually for less production demanding fare, like action or horror. For sci fi, 3 years is the trend. So, 3 movies, 3 years each, 9 years. Round up, you have 10.

Not a scientific formula, but it's a discussion predicated entirely on speculation, so it's a reasonably plausible scenario at the time.

"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."

BYTEMITE

Thursday, February 24, 2011 2:18 AM

Hey Rhuttner. I noticed you tried to respond to me. Fireflyfans has a glitch sometimes, try posting at the new version of the site. http://beta.fireflyfans.net/main.aspx?i=0

Hope you stay around and keep posting.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 NEXT PAGE