Firefly == Gilmore Girls in Space?
POSTED BY: pforhan
UPDATED: Friday, December 20, 2002 05:17
VIEWED: 6977
PAGE 1 of 2
My wife had a couple of good points about Firefly: It features comedy-packed conversation and antics in what is basically (sometimes tragically) a drama. The lines often come so fast you don't catch them all in one sitting. That's a reason why Gilmore Girls on the WB is so much fun.
Furthermore, the chemistry and motivation for each character and their relationship with each other is incredibly riveting. That's a reason why Gilmore Girls on the WB is so addictive.
What do you think? Does that sound too crazy? Firefly may not have a fast-talking mother-and-daughter duo, but I think the comparison is valid.
Pat.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There are quite a handful of dramas with quick dialog peppered with comedic elements, between compelling characters. Whichever two (or more) of them someone likes and watches much are bound to seem very comparable to that viewer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I think you've got a point. I've been looking for that sort of comparison as I try to hook everybody I know into watching. What I came up with last night was that it's sort of the sci-fi show you'd see on Lifetime. I know, Tori Spelling and all that, but what I was getting at was the underlying humanism & strong female voices & the theme of relationships, relationships, relationships. The comparison worked on my friend insofar as it made him stop and get intrigued--YES!
On a side note, my roommate told me last night if this show doesn't continue somehow she's going to have go through some serious grief because this isn't just a show to her, she feels that these people exist somewhere, that they are real and living their lives and canceling the show is, well, like seeing them all die. It sounds a little crazy this morning, but I know how she feels.
How can this show be so complete, so realized in just half a season? Where are the "bugs" that new shows invariably have to "get out?" Where's the character that hasn't "gelled" yet? Nowhere.
Remember, no matter where Firefly goes, there she is.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by pforhan:
The lines often come so fast you don't catch them all in one sitting.
I have to admit that I'm not a Gilmore Girls fan-- not because I don't like it, but simply because I've never really given it much attention-- but this sounds very Sorkinesque. I'm a huge, giant fan of the late, lamented Sports Night, and I've even been known to watch The West Wing on a couple of occasions. Aaron Sorkin has a very distinctive writing style, and from what little I've seen it looks like Gilmore Girls resembles that style quite closely.
Joss's writing, though, is different. Every time I see something written by Joss, something whacks me over the head anew. And the thing is this: Joss is not afraid of silence. Sorkin tends to cram as much rapid-fire dialogue into a scene as possible. It's great fun if you can keep up. And when he does use silence, it's to great effect because it happens so seldom.
Joss, on the other hand, is all about silence. Quiet moments. Consider some of his best work: the Buffy episodes "Restless," "The Body," and (duh) "Hush" were all really quiet hours of TV. This is just as true of "Objects in Space." Long stretches of silence between occasional lines of spoken dialogue.
By way of contrast, here's a typical Sorkinesque scene:
1: "You think I'm in love with her?"
2: "Yeah."
1: "Well, I'm not."
2: "Okay."
1: "I'm not in love with her."
2: "Okay."
1: "We're friends."
2: "Sure."
1: "Very close friends, admittedly."
2: "Of course."
1: "But I'm not in love with her."
2: "No?"
1: "No."
2: "Okay. (beat) Here's the thing."
1: "What?"
2: "You're in love with her."
1: "I know."
On the other hand, consider the same scene in typical Jossian style:
1: "You think I'm in love with her?"
2: "Yeah."
(Thirty solid seconds of silence as they stare at their shoes, avoiding eye contact, communicating every way but verbally.)
1: "Yeah."
(Fade out. The end.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hum...ok I haven't watched much of Gilmore Girl(read never tried it) but from what I read it's nothing like Firefly....I really can't see how you can compare these 2 show together...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by YeAhItSme:
Hum...ok I haven't watched much of Gilmore Girl(read never tried it) but from what I read it's nothing like Firefly....I really can't see how you can compare these 2 show together...
I know you guys think me crazy for comparing the shows... (and yes, Gilmore is very similar in style to Sports Night).
It's true, Firefly does not take place in a small Northeastern town. And also true that it does not have quite the barrage of dialog.
But I have to stand by the comparison. Firefly is so packed with well-written and acted goodies that I have to turn off my laptop to actually watch the show or I'll miss a lot of the fun.
Although, that's where the comparison breaks down for me. I don't turn off the laptop for Gilmore Girls...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
That torture scene in Gilmore Girls was a real hoot! And all the legal prostitutes running around...! 
Seriously, both shows are cleverly verbose, but that's pretty much where the comparison ends for me.
I would never describe Firefly as "Gilmore Girls in space". Petri dish comparisons don't really work for this show: "It's Star Wars meets Sergio Leone... no wait... one part Trek and two parts Silverado..."
I describe Firefly to my friends who haven't watched it as "You ain't seen nothin' like it on TV, trust me!" and "Your all time favorite show you just don't know it yet."
Then I sit them down and show them Our Mrs. Reynolds, Ariel, and/or War Stories. I sure hope y'all have been taping this show... Firefly definitely speaks for itself.
mattro
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Twirlip:
By way of contrast, here's a typical Sorkinesque scene:
1: "You think I'm in love with her?"
2: "Yeah."
1: "Well, I'm not."
2: "Okay."
1: "I'm not in love with her."
2: "Okay."
1: "We're friends."
2: "Sure."
1: "Very close friends, admittedly."
2: "Of course."
1: "But I'm not in love with her."
2: "No?"
1: "No."
2: "Okay. (beat) Here's the thing."
1: "What?"
2: "You're in love with her."
1: "I know."
On the other hand, consider the same scene in typical Jossian style:
1: "You think I'm in love with her?"
2: "Yeah."
(Thirty solid seconds of silence as they stare at their shoes, avoiding eye contact, communicating every way but verbally.)
1: "Yeah."
(Fade out. The end.)
Bravo!!!wild applause! That was great!
QT
QueenTiye, Companion Academy, class of 2006
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Isn't that the two main sportscaster guys on sports night? I sort of vaguely remember that scene.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by bobknaptor:
Isn't that the two main sportscaster guys on sports night? I sort of vaguely remember that scene.
I think there were 44 episodes of Sports Night committed to film, give or take a few. That exact conversation must have been in 30 of 'em. Why do you think I was able to repeat it from memory? ;-)
Good times.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME