General Discussions

Did Joss paint himself into a corner with Serenity?

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Monday, September 1, 2008 22:55
VIEWED: 28681
PAGE 4 of 8

PENNAUSAMIKE

Monday, August 25, 2008 12:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
And what I like about Joss is that he goes beyond entertainment, doesn't present hollow fake idealizations of life.

You are twisting what I'm saying by equating uplifting, positive entertainment with "hollow fake idealizations of life".

Quote:
You seem to be laying down a rule where maybe you have no right. When you write your own show, you can take your audience into fantasy land by making everything perfect and safe and happy. Joss chooses differently. Speaking for myself, I must say: Thank god he does!

I'm not laying down a rule but rather, I spent a number of (apparently wasted) words and examples to put forth MY opinion that Serenity isn't true to its own nature; and it paid for Joss not knowing how far you can push an audiences' buttons with a $25 million box office gross; as compared to Ironman (which got it right) doing over ten times that business.

Quote:
All entertainment is audience manipulation. You appear to feeling bitter that this particular manipulation was a sad one, rather than a show coaxing you into some happy fantasyland for two hours.

Once again you demean my position (Firefly was realistic AND uplifting) by making the leap that I think Serenity should have been "some happy fantasyland for two hours".
You also blew off my whole point that Book's death serviced the plot and character in the story whereas Wash's death was aimed at creating an audience reaction. But based on the quote below, what you seek from a story is 180 degrees out from what I look for...

Quote:
When every death in a show is played out like the Shepherd's, all carefully played out to have a well defined effect on the plot, I start to see nothing but the hand of the writer. The fantasy is ruined for me.

See, I'm the opposite!
Book's death serviced the story,
(makes the story real to me)
Wash's death was the writer saying,
"be scared,audience, I'm the writer and I-Can-Kill-Them-All!"

Quote:
You see what I'm saying?

Yes I do, and I don't agree with you and that's fine.
But it isn't necessary to demean my points to present yours.

And I believe the failure of Serenity to reach a mass audience like
Ironman (uplifting and positive)
or The Dark Knight (just...dark)
is that it tried to be too many things.
I believe killing Wash is one of several examples where Serenity lost its way and alienated audiences, to the detriment of seeing more of the 'verse on the big OR little screen.

CHRISISALL

Monday, August 25, 2008 12:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pennausamike:
MY opinion that Serenity isn't true to its own nature

As Darkness said in Legend, "All things change, lady."

I would not have killed off Wash.
But I am not Joss.
Or Buddha.

Chrisisall

ECGORDON

Monday, August 25, 2008 1:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pennausamike:
Quote:
I'm not laying down a rule but rather, I spent a number of (apparently wasted) words and examples to put forth MY opinion that Serenity isn't true to its own nature; and it paid for Joss not knowing how far you can push an audiences' buttons with a $25 million box office gross; as compared to Ironman (which got it right) doing over ten times that business.

It's ridiculous even trying to compare the two films. Iron Man had the higher gross not because it is a better film (it most definitely is not) but rather because of its pre-sold nature. A high-profile superhero movie from Marvel with ten times the promotion from Paramount as Universal did for Serenity, plus a known commodity in Robert Downey Jr. as the lead. Compare that with the relatively unknown television series that was the basis of Serenity, one which the majority of movie-goers had never heard of (and still haven't), featuring no big name stars.

Hell, you didn't even join this site until nearly a year after Serenity premiered in theaters and about six months after it came out on dvd, probably about the time it started airing on HBO and Cinemax. Did you see it in the theater? If not, how can you now judge what it was about it that didn't sell itself? People who do not see an unknown movie on its first release usually don't do so because they have heard negative things about events in the movie, but rather because they haven't heard anything about it, period.

I don't think anyone is trying to tell you that you can't have your own opinion, just that the majority of us don't agree with it.

wo men ren ran zai fei xing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

SWISH

Monday, August 25, 2008 1:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pennausamike:
You are twisting what I'm saying by equating uplifting, positive entertainment with "hollow fake idealizations of life".

You said: "when entertainment is tempered by MISERY it becomes a reflection of life and ceases to be entertainment." And you have the authority to set down this definition? It's one thing to say: I didn't find it entertaining. It's another to lay down a definition of entertainment and placing Serenity outside of it. As my mama used to say: who died and left you in charge?

You also said: "Good entertainment resonates of real life without getting sucked into dwelling on real life drawbacks." So you don't want the negative aspects of real life in your entertainment. That's fine. But to me, this kind of entertainment is an idealization, and often comes off as fake and hollow.

Note that I call the *entertainment* fake and hollow, not you. It was not my intent to demean you personally. I'm sure you're a rocking dude. Or chick.

Quote:
I'm not laying down a rule but rather, I spent a number of (apparently wasted) words and examples to put forth MY opinion that Serenity isn't true to its own nature; and it paid for Joss not knowing how far you can push an audiences' buttons with a $25 million box office gross; as compared to Ironman (which got it right) doing over ten times that business.

I believe it is not your job or mine to define Firefly's nature. That job is Joss's. We can like what he does with it, or not, but to call it *wrong* (as you seem to be doing, sorry if I'm misinterpreting) seems a bit much. Defining it as "not entertainment." Whatever! I don't like the movie as much as the series, but when I sit down and watch it I'm still pretty damned entertained!

Also, if box office revenue is how you define the proper "nature" of entertainment, then how about those ratings numbers when Firefly first aired, huh? That show sure must have sucked!

Quote:
Once again you demean my position (Firefly was realistic AND uplifting) by making the leap that I think Serenity should have been "some happy fantasyland for two hours".

I don't demean your position. You have every right to it. I simply state my own opinion: entertainment that must avoid any negative aspects of real life is fantasyland.

Not that there's anything wrong with fantasyland. I've read a bodice ripper or two in my time. But I disagree with imposing this form on Serenity. Firefly had plenty of grit, and if it didn't go so far as killing a beloved character, surely that's only because there were so few episodes. Don't fool yourself into thinking it wouldn't have happened eventually. I believe someone already posted that Joss was planning on killing a main character at some point.

Quote:
You also blew off my whole point that Book's death serviced the plot and character in the story whereas Wash's death was aimed at creating an audience reaction.

I didn't blow that off. My point was that ALL entertainment is about getting an audience reaction. To cherry pick some event as too much of this and say it ruins the whole movie seems a bit of a low blow. If that's what it did for you, that's a shame. But don't pull the whole movie down, calling it "not entertainment", because you disagree with one choice.

Again, there's a difference between saying you weren't entertained and saying that it's not entertainment.

I do see your point that Wash's death may have destroyed your suspension of disbelief. But here's a question: if Serenity 2 came out and involved things that directly follow from Wash's death... say, maybe Joss has always been planning that River's Academy has a division for building Robocops out of dead pilots. This was to be the foundation of Firefly season 3, Zoe's battle with her Robopilot dead husband. Once you were done ridiculing the stupid plot, would you forgive Joss for killing off Wash? Because there was plotty motivation and it wasn't solely for audience reaction?

Quote:
See, I'm the opposite!
Book's deat

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

PENNAUSAMIKE

Monday, August 25, 2008 1:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ecgordon:

Hell, you didn't even join this site until nearly a year after Serenity premiered in theaters....

I don't think anyone is trying to tell you that you can't have your own opinion, just that the majority of us don't agree with it.

When I joined doesn't affect the rightness or wrongness of my opinions.
And:
I don't claim to speak for the majority of Firefly/Serenity fans BUT I don't think you should, either.

While some (including Joss) may think Wash's death was a good idea at the time,
I haven't heard ANYONE say,
"Boy I sure am glad Wash is dead!"

PENNAUSAMIKE

Monday, August 25, 2008 2:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
I believe it is not your job or mine to define Firefly's nature. That job is Joss's.

So he (Joss) had to choose one genre to focus on, and went with fast-paced adventure.

And once he "defined" the genre, I feel he needed to be true to THAT nature.

Quote:
The fact that so many new fans did bond with it, and went to find the series and then came here, speaks volumes.

And that is the success of Serenity.
I just feel that the downer elements put into the action climax kept it from sealing the deal.

That's OK, I'm doing the 'verse my own way.
Firefly Fan Film, "Fool Me Twice".
costumes seen here:
http://fireflydvd.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3541&start=30

about half way down the page.

See, this Alliance sergeant realizes that the Unification he fought for isn't all it was cracked up to be.
Sorry folks; happy ending.

SLOWHAND

Monday, August 25, 2008 2:32 AM

Um....I didn't mean Zoe and Mal would have a romantic interest in each other, for those that thought that. I never said that. What I meant was protecting Mal was one of the things that gave Zoe purpose. If he settled down, he wouldn't need her to be at his right hand anymore. His life and purpose would have changed.

There's several schools of thought here and everyone is entitled to their opinion. I'm of the group that likes my entertainment to be...entertaining. Yes you need drama. Yes people die. But to me, killing off beloved characters goes beyond keeping it real. That's a realness I don't want in my entertainment. To me, it's like watching a new Batman movie and Batman get's killed 5 minutes into the thing. The rest of the movie is told from Gordon's POV. Well, that may be real, but as a Batman movie, it would be pretty disapointing.

I'm of the group that wants the whole crew back. I'm not interested in seeing Zoe live life as a widow. I'm not interested in seeing Mal and Inara married with kids. Those aren't the characters I fell in love with. That's just not Firefly to me.

But that's just me.

TUJIAOZUO

Monday, August 25, 2008 4:01 AM

Quote:
Do they have cloning tech? Surely the Alliance does, we're cloning sheep now, why not people in the future?
IF that is the case, what would happen if Wash was killed, but for some reason the Blue Hands decided to clone him? Then he could be an agent provocateur, inserting himself back into the crew, for some twisted purpose he may or may not know.

Even though we're talking about SciFi and let's face it, cloning has been done many times in SciFi (the first reason why I doubt Joss wouldn't visit it), cloning has been found to be something entirely different than what we all think. Just because another being is created from a copy of someone's genetic code, doesn't mean the copy will be exactly like the original. Often there can be physical and personality differences making the copy it's own unique self. They could clone Wash, but it may not look nor act like Wash, Clone!Wash could be six inches taller with green eyes and a distaste for Hawaiian shirts and dinosaurs (as well as the quiet type even). Even though I'm totally against rising the dead, the SuperOrgan Replacement mentioned somewhere above would be my vote for fixing up Wash and Book, though I think if the Alliance had taken Wash's body from Serenity, Zoe would go into berserker amazon mode and there would be hell to pay. Serious hell to pay.

The problem with Serenity isn't the deaths, because that, while saddening, creates a new structure for the crew. Roles are shifted, healing has to take place, life has to move on. In the Firefly 'verse it's the new frontier. In the old frontier people died (frequently) roles were shifted, folk pulled themselves up by their bootstraps and kept moving. And our crew has that strength to do that, it will take time, but it has to be done in order to keep exisiting. depending on your view of entertainment, I think it would be highly entertaining to see that as well as true to the canon of the show. Nandi died before, her girls wept, but they picked themselves up and kept living. In Firefly there is alot of darkness, but it is balanced out with humor and hope. If it was happy all the time, it would get boring. Granted I wouldn't want Joss to kill off every relationship or send them spiraling into a path of destruction like he's done to every other series (because even though I know he wants to be 'realistic' realistically alot of relationships do survive and become stronger through tough times, and people don't suddenly die after finding love either).

What Serenity lacks is the texture of Firefly. Firefly had so many precious moments; the crew having dinner together, playing cards, Inara and Kaylee having their girl time, Jayne picking on Simon, Wash and Zoe as a couple, even River and Kaylee running around and playing. So much was in the show that helped shape it into the realism that Joss strived for. It's what balanced the dark and it's what the movie lacked. There was no heavy vein of a unconventional family, a theme heavily present in the series. I know that there was no way to show it since the movie had the crew fractured and ready to part ways, but that made the movie hard to swallow is that we didn't see what made them pull away, we didn't see Book go or Inara leave (and the comics don't give that justice because it's such an intregal bridge from the show to the movie). The movie had the plot, it had the action and the drama, but it completely lacked the texture and the intimate moments of the universe of Firefly, that's what's wrong with Serenity. Not the deaths.

I think that there are alot of reprocussions to visit after Serenity besides the dealing with the death of crewmembers. Like the backlash of the tape, the reaction of the planets, as well as what the Alliance Friendly Guild would have to say about Inara helping a band of rebels air such a politically dangerous tape. Let's face it, her certification could be on the line.
-Then there's Zoe's gradual recovery.
-River's continual growth (she's got a long way but it would be interesting, I suspect it would be rough but she would

NCBROWNCOAT

Monday, August 25, 2008 5:11 AM

And then there's the whole Blue Sun arc that Joss didn't have time to explore. It would fit in well with the reaction of the Alliance to the Miranda wave.

And cloning, you'd have to wait 30 odd years for Washclone to grow up. Clones do age normally and not at fantastic rates so no magical adult Wash several months after the BDM.

http://fireflyfaninnc.livejournal.com/

PENNAUSAMIKE

Monday, August 25, 2008 5:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ncbrowncoat:
And then there's the whole Blue Sun arc that Joss didn't have time to explore. It would fit in well with the reaction of the Alliance to the Miranda wave.

Oh yeah, we wanna see the return of Blue Sun!
Another cool Firefly concept that got swept aside in the abbreviated movie 'verse.

Quote:
And cloning, you'd have to wait 30 odd years for Washclone to grow up. Clones do age normally and not at fantastic rates so no magical adult Wash several months after the BDM.

I can't see cloning working because it is substitute Wash instead of repaired Wash.
And the tech for repair is in the 'verse, cloning is not.
In my mind, until a film or series continuation says different, the crew put Wash in River's cryo-box to take him home for burial. Along the way, they are informed by Simon that the same medical tech that produced Tracy's hopped up internal organs ("million credit meat" in Tracy's words) are accessible at Government reseaerch facilities. Using a bit of improvisation and Book's ident card, they sneak Wash in in place of a politico who bumped a deserving recipient (ala PA's governor Casey who bumped everybody down the list for his transplant). Alliance bashing, witty dialog and some gunplay ensues. The Firefly 'verse returns to normal.