Noel MacNeal wrote:

This was, without question, one of the best acted, written, directed, and shot series EVER. The very fact that it was wasted on Fox and their complete impatience and ignorance in dealing with a show that had more depth than "So you think you can dance" (but then a child's wading pool has more depth) taught us never to watch a series on Fox until after it has come out on DVD. (Case point; those poor souls who actually watched the series "Reunion" only to have the rug yanked out from under them midway.

All hail Joss!

posted at July 20, 2006 07:08 PM

Dave wrote:

Well I watched the firefly marathon on sci fi one day at work and man it ROCKED. What a great show, hell I even stayed after hours to watch the end of it. I did not know there was a movie, but I will be surely looking. What a great show and cast of characters. Great lines, great props, and realistic themes.

posted at July 20, 2006 08:58 PM

Courtney wrote:

It's always a shame when brilliance is not recognized by the big studios. So many of my friends adore this show, and it's sad that no new episodes will brighten our lives. Kudos to SciFi for running the show in the weeks prior to the movie release, though. We can always count on SciFi!

posted at July 21, 2006 09:37 AM

Usama A wrote:

As a Whedon fan I watched the show (in its original order) and fell in love with it immediately. Of course it seems the show has no chance of being resurrected but it is still fun to at least introduce this show to those who missed it. This does not always work out for the best, one friend was upset that I got them hooked on a show that wasn't on. Anyway, thank you to the cast & crew of this show for creating a wonderful show.

posted at July 21, 2006 05:52 PM

retro-yoshi wrote:

Guys, Fox is the channel that asked Chris Carter, producer of "The X-Files", to come up with a second follow up after "Millenium". The result was "Harsh Realm", and what did they do with it? They cancelled it after THREE FRICKIN' WEEKS. This is the most trigger happy network on TV. They want an audience right NOW, or your show is dead. I'm convinced that "Arrested Development" only survived as long as it did because it had very powerful and very rich fans.

posted at July 22, 2006 12:16 AM

Elise wrote:

I saw Serenity thinking that it was going to just be another space movie that wasn't very good, but I loved it. I shortly learned afterwards that there was a show. My brother said he liked the show. I finally got to see about 6 episodes of it on the Sci-Fi channel the other day. I was just shocked that such a great show got cancelled. I thought it was a good show that was not anything like all those other space shows or sci fi shows like Battlestar Galactica or some of the others, it was different and I loved it. I am so sad that there will be no more episodes to watch. When I saw the show it made me love the movie ten times more. I just want more of it.

posted at July 23, 2006 01:06 AM

Mykah wrote:

OMG I wish that the series would be able to be remade through someones else's eyes just to see more of weldons thoughts in new episodes.hell jsut new episodes in general....but I will have to be content with the box set and movie

posted at July 23, 2006 10:49 AM

Kyla wrote:

Firefly is the best television series ever aired. I will never understand why so many people love shows like Buffy, Ameican Idol, and the miillions of others that have no depth to them. Firefly was so brilliant. Serenity was wonderful. I'm heartbroken that its over. But I hope someday there will be a new show that is as wonderful as Firefly.

posted at July 23, 2006 03:03 PM

jeffiner wrote:

Firefly is by far my favorite show EVER. [or WAS, since it's been cancelled, or IS since it's so far being shown on SciFi]. I love the dynamic between every character, the awesome and indepth storylines, and the entire idea overall. Firefly was unjustly cancelled and Fox should be ashamed. [Arrested Development? Futurama? Family Guy?! etc...]
Maybe one day another network will realize the greatness that is Firefly and call them back..
until then...

posted at July 23, 2006 10:41 PM

Lady Muck wrote:

Firefly was spectacular television. It is testimony to the love and devotion of Whedon and cast that the show still lives on in the affection of many people. A great pity and a huge missed opportunity that it wasn't allowed to grow and develop.

FOX clearly have no taste in shows seeing that cancelled this show and yet keep the mediocre madTV for season after season, ad nauseum.

posted at July 24, 2006 03:31 AM

pisher wrote:

Um, didn't you forget to mention that the movie flopped worse than the show? I guess Universal didn't get it either? Frankly, neither did I, and I was into Buffy from the first episode (though not by the last one, I must confess--Angel ended much stronger).

It's more of a shame when cleverness is mistaken for brilliance, IMO.

Firefly failed because people didn't like it. Serenity failed because people didn't like it. Word of Mouth can save a badly promoted series or film--why didn't it in this case? Because word of mouth was bad. Why don't people who loved the show and the film recognize that word of mouth was bad? Because they only tend to talk to people who share their tastes--or want to avoid hurting their feelings. Because they live in a bubble, to avoid reality. So they can pretend they were worshipping greatness, while they were actually just wasting time online, congratulating themselves for watching a TV show. ::sigh::

posted at July 24, 2006 04:06 AM

Diane wrote:

I was introduced to Firefly shortly before the movie came out.. the SciFi channel ran a marathon.
I fell in love instantly with this show. It's amazing story telling with characters you will never forget. Reminds me of the first Star Wars films.. only better.

This show and the movie does deserve another shot and it's only right that fans are working hard to make that happen. We've done it before.. "Done the Impossible" the fans story of just that has been released and it just inspires me to do more of what it takes to get this show/movie understood and liked by all.

It is a unique vision of space and space travel.. interesting and thought provoking. On a human level. That is rare and I think there ought to be more of it.

posted at July 24, 2006 08:09 AM

CJ WIlliams wrote:

Wow, thats all i can seem to say. a friend of mine borowed me his box set of firefly, i saw the movie serenity and was interested, to say the least. that was only a few short days ago. I know sit here, tired, hungery, and in need of a good shower. i sat up straight watching the whole thing, front to back (no small task let me tell you) I am now craving to see more. Even with the inclusion of the movie 'Serenity', i feel this storyline could go so much farther. I've always digged stories with true and characters, ones with emotion and real depth. I also have (previously) watched the entire series of Angel, that, and buffy, made me fall in love with Joss Whedon's work. That love broke my heart today when this series came to a screeching hault. i assumed maybe closer or something, but realized any story worth telling, is worth being told right. and any story told right, must not be rushed. i would love to see more of this, i mean, cowboys in space, how go'ram sweet is that!! I will now apoligize if any of this is non-sensical or gramatically incorrect as i had aformentioned, im kinda tired. need sleep. and food. G'night! Joss Whedon, your still the best!

posted at July 24, 2006 08:38 AM

mlgm wrote:

Why, oh, why can't one of these reviews ever even consider this idea: Firefly failed because it was a bad show. No, Fox did NOT kill it. This is simply factually wrong. Fox started the advertizing blitz for Firefly within a week of the May upfronts. It did not bury it. It gave it X-Files original time slot. It advertized on many cable networks, in print, and on the Internet. I simply can't think of any show except for Lost that got similar treatment in the last ten years. And Lost was a winner straight out of the box.

Firefly? Started OK, but the more people saw? The more they didn't like. Check the ratings. Second half-hour always got lower ratings than the first. And the week-to-week were almost steadily downward.

The writing was never about developing characters, but always about showing how very, very, clever Whedon and his writers are. And Nathan Fillon's incrediably bad acting job, his usually mumbling copying of Han Solo, was the final nail.

You liked the show? Happy for you. But most people that say it, didn't. They didn't tune in again. And not because of Fox which did everything possible to promote a very expensive show. But because the show wasn't very good.

posted at July 24, 2006 08:51 AM

Sprunkner wrote:

No, Firefly failed because Fox showed most of the episodes out of order, starting with the second episode and showing the pilot last, bumped the show for sporting events, and didn't give it more than a half-season's chance.

You don't like Whedon's writing, then that's fine. But when I've shown this show to twenty different people who all loved it, many of whom were never Whedon fans, it's stupid to assume that the show failed on its own merits. I'll agree that it was much smarter than an average TV viewer could get. But Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars and Buffy itself succeeded based on a more intelligent demographic. Fox should have had some faith in Joss Whedon, of all people!

posted at July 24, 2006 10:16 AM

bluesun wrote:

mlgm, you have no idea what you're talking about. Yes, they started advertising Firefly in May. Yes, they gave it the X-Files old time slot.

BUT they didn't continue supporting it! They didn't show the actual pilot which gave all the backstory until after the show was over. They dropped episodes that were crucial to the storyline. It was a brilliant show - Fox gave up on it too early. The DVD sales and completely sold-out showings of the movie should prove that to anybody who actually pays attention.

posted at July 24, 2006 10:52 AM

Tom wrote:

mlgm, imagine if abc never aired the pilot for "lost" and just started with the second episode. People would have no idea what's going on, and most likely would be turned off from the get go. Well, that's what fox did. It's hard to get into a show when the entire backstory is never really explained.

posted at July 24, 2006 11:55 AM

mlgm wrote:

Actually bluesun, I know exactly what I'm talking about. You are missing some facts. And being personally insulting. And showing your own ignorance and undercutting your own argument.

Fox continued to support the show after Whedon didn't bring the pilot either on budget or on schedule. They continued to support it after the reviews from critics that had seen the pilot all went exactly like: it's not very good but I like Joss so I'll give it a couple of shows. I invite you to do your research on the reviews. And yet Fox continued to widely advertise and talk up the show. Only after the ratings tanked again, and again, and again was the show canceled. Firefly received more support than any show I can think of until Lost. The simple fact is this: despite massive promotion, the ratings started middling and got worse every week.

Serenity had a few sold-out previews. But most of the actual showings didn't bring enough money to keep the movie held over the second week. I invite you to talk to theater managers. As for DVD sales? OK, but no Family Guy, Simpson, or Futurama. Good, solid; but then what genre show isn't? Genre folks buy DVDs at a higher rate than sitcom and soap opera fans.

First, I know they didn't show the pilot first. Most shows don't. And Lost is built on the premise that we don't know the backstory and it is doing just fine.

Second, I watched both Buffy & Angel. I enjoyed Whedon's writing until he became convinced of his own godhood.

You know people that liked Firefly? I believe you. But I'll bet you know quite a few that didn't and just ignore that fact. But why don't you believe the people that stopped watching? The ratings went down show to show. They went down half-hour to half-hour. I know many genre fans that watched a few, and never went back. To say somehow you're more intelligent than people that dislike it is incredibly vicious, and simply unknowable.

I know that Firefly fans liked the show; but the truth is simply this: a great many more people didn't. Yet these same people like X-Files and Lost, two complicated shows. Intelligent, thoughtful people watched Firefly and said: self-indulgent writing, ridiculous premise, bad acting.

Yes, people every bit as intelligent you held that opinion. And when you talk down to them, and hold yourself superior? You simply make them all the more certain in their opinion.

posted at July 24, 2006 02:10 PM

pisher wrote:

When people say "They didn't promote it properly", they're ignoring two things:

1)Two entirely different companies BOTH somehow failed to promote it properly--FOX (which is known for superb promotion), and Universal (whose promotion was hailed by fans as brilliant until AFTER the movie flopped, at which time they quickly went from saviors to scapegoats).

2)Ultimately the quality of the promotion depends a great deal on the quality of the show/film. Not quality as defined by a handful of diehard fans, or worshipful critics, but quality as defined by the people actually spending their time and/or money to see a show or film. I look at Firefly/Serenity, and I pity the hell out of the poor promotional people at FOX and Universal. How on earth do you market this thing? No stars, silly-sounding concept, lame titles, unimpressive visuals. You can say Joss Whedon did it, and that does get the interest of a fair number of people--myself included, because he's done some things I really enjoyed--okay, he did one thing I really enjoyed, and I stopped enjoying it after the fifth season, but that's SOMEthing. It just wasn't enough. Very few people are interested in paying ten bucks to see "A Film By Joss Whedon" when that's all they really know about it.

Which is precisely why he's clinging so desperately Wonder Woman, in spite of interminable delays. He's hoping that he can prove himself commercially by attaching himself to a 'brandname' people have heard of. And this is the best one he could get. There's nothing happening with this movie now--he could do something else, like "Goners" (assuming Universal actually is willing to make that, after Serenity's failure, and I've heard no confirmation of that, from Whedon or Universal). But if that failed, he'd be a goner himself.

He really does need to swallow his pride, and go back to television--and look in the mirror every morning and say "I am not a genius auteur--I am not a genius auteur--I am not a genius auteur."

Oh, and he also needs to never go on the internet again--not on his fansites, anyway. ;)

posted at July 24, 2006 04:00 PM

Trace wrote:

Actually mlgm (does the "m" stand for Mitch permaybehaps), you may know what you claim to talk about but you're lying. Or ignorant. Or both.

The pilot, "Serenity", was in the can and ready when the FOX suits (who didn't "get it"... see also their question about why there were horses) gave Joss and Tim about 72 hours to come up with a 1-hour pilot to replace what they had already done.

They then, as already stated, repeatedly rearranged and pre-empted airings until most folks who were casually looking for it gave up trying to piece it together.

THAT is NOT how you build a following for a show.

But thanks for playing. That part you said about how networks don't show the pilot first- comedy GOLD!

posted at July 24, 2006 04:50 PM

madmolly wrote:

mlgm- Fox didn't like the pilot, said it wasn't in your face action enough for them. So they went with the Train Job first. It had nothing to do with budget or timeframe.

And of all the people I have shared my DVDs of Firefly with (about 15), only one has not been hooked. Everyone else has always turned to me by the fifth episode and said "Why did they cancel this show?" And then they have proceeded to go out and buy their own set.

Comparing LOST to Firefly is just ridiculous. Two completely different shows. And you don't need the backstory to LOST because it is told in segments every week. That is their hook.

posted at July 24, 2006 04:53 PM

Shiroiko wrote:

I don't know about anyone else, but I felt like this show wasn't promoted well.

Yes, I remember the onslaught of ads for it, but they really didn't appeal to me and I purposely chose to not watch the show because the advertising had me CONVINCED it was insipid.

So years later I was bored, had Netflix, ended up renting the series, and found I loved it. I felt a connection with it that the ads led me to believe could never be there.

You can throw money at ads, but if they aren't good and don't communicate clearly what a show is no amount of advertising will work (honestly, I don't feel that Serenity was promoted well either).

Yes, every channel does this, but Fox does this a bit more than average. The promotional campaigns for most of Fox's querky shows have a nasty habit of not understanding the intended audience (Wonderfalls is a prime example of this... there were a sea of ads that said next to nothing about what the show was like).

Also, Fox has a strange habit of getting excited about odd little shows and then not being patient enough to see them through. X Files and Buffy (some of the most influential sci-fi shows of recent times) took awhile to build up their core audience. This does not happen overnight except on the rarest of occasions (I would suggest Lost was a fluke... a fluke that I'm happy about, but a fluke nonetheless). Showing the episodes out of order on a show that was more sequential than not (you can't watch the episodes in broadcast order and not feel significantly more confused than the intended order leaves you) and messing around with the broadcast schedule does not help a show build a loyal fanbase.

Would Firefly have ever pulled in the amount of viewers that many hit shows do? Probably not. But it would have likely built the stable fanbase that many other Sci-Fi shows develop over time. And a stable fanbase means a stable income from a show. A more modest yet stable show can, over time, be almost as valuable an asset as a hit seres (especially considering how often "hit" shows fizzle out).

posted at July 24, 2006 06:43 PM

Pseudothink wrote:

I got all worked up for the series back in 2002, thanks to Fox's hype machine, but without the backstory of the "true" pilot episode, the first episode's character dynamics and universe made no sense to me. I turned it off about halfway through, went online, and posted in the same forums where I'd hyped it up earlier, saying that it was a big disappointment and to not bother watching it. I wrote it off and never saw it on TV again (easy to do on Friday night at 8pm!).

I ended up buying the DVD series about a year and a half later, after noticing nothing but praise for it from Slashdot users over that time. I realized I must have gotten the wrong first impression, watched the unedited series in the correct order, and I've been a diehard browncoat ever since.

My only complaint with the movie was that the trailers made it look like a somewhat cheesy sci-fi action flick. I admit, though, I wouldn't have enjoyed it even half as much without having seen the series first. Thankfully I did, and seeing the movie in a theater full of hundreds of other fans was an amazing experience. Definitely watch the series before the movie, though, or you'll spoil both.

posted at July 24, 2006 08:10 PM

DAVE wrote:

Actually, mlgm, you don't know what you're talking about- repeating that you do 5 times will not change the facts, which are well known by now. Here are some- the order in which Fox actually aired the episodes (from the DVD packaging) - 2,3,6,7,8,4,5,9,10,14,1. Episodes 11-13: never aired. Episode 1 is the 2-hour pilot, which sets up a rather complicated premise. Shown 3 months after the series "started", and dead last. There were 3 weeks in there with no shows, for the World Series and such, and it changed air time and night. The narrative flow of the series is as important in Firefly as in Lost- if you don't know this you haven't watched the show (which frankly is obvious from your posts)- do you honestly believe anyone would have understood what was going on in Lost if ABC had shown Lost's episodes in the above "order"? Nonsense. How was Firefly supposed to find an audience?? Lost would have died with the same treatment. Of course the ratings stunk at the time.

As for the movie Serenity, again for some "real" facts (from Boxofficemojo.com), the movie cost $39M to make and made $38.85M in worldwide boxoffice- very respectable and hardly a disaster financially- it made back what they spent. It was in theaters for seven weeks, not one. From Wikipedia: "Serenity won film of the year awards from Film 2005[2] and FilmFocus.[3] It also won IGN Film's Best Sci-Fi, Best Story and Best Trailer awards and was runner up for the Overall Best Movie.[4] It also won Nebula Award for Best Script for 2005." Roger Ebert loved it, and Manohla Dargis (main reviewer of NY Times) said it was "everything Star Wars III was not") ie, having a head and a heart, and characters you care about.

I happen to believe that Universal completely blew the trailer campaign for Serenity- they were far too cute by half, showing what amounted to a series of arch one-liners that only the "Browncoats" would appreciate or get... I am a huge fan of the series, but found myself cringing when the trailer came on TV. I knew it wasn't the way to go. And I'm guessing that's what you're basing a lot of your opinion on- you've seen neither the show or the movie- or, if you tuned in the show when it was first shown and was hopelessly confused and frustrated by it (like everyone else)- well, that is totally Fox's doing.

posted at July 24, 2006 08:56 PM

Melissa wrote:

First, I know they didn't show the pilot first. Most shows don't.

Um, what? Since when do most TV shows not show the pilot first? I was under the empression that they did because that is what a pilot is.

posted at July 24, 2006 10:31 PM

Mac wrote:

To mlgm:

There are people in the world who do not like Shakespeare and think his plays are poorly written.
I would submit to you that, based on the large sale of DVD's of both the series and the movie, there is a very large supportive fan base for "FIREFLY" and "SERENITY" I do not watch "LOST" because I find it boring; but that's my opinion. I know of some people who can't stand "The Andy Griffith Show".
Your postings sound like you are desperatley trying to convince someone of your position (perhaps yourself).
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion and, by all means, back it up with what ever statistics you can avail yourself of.

Just be aware; you are outnumbered in this.

posted at July 24, 2006 11:26 PM

John wrote:

Okay, first, how is airing episode out of order promoting it? Episode 2 "The Train Job" aired fist, Episode 3 "Bushwhacked" aired second, Epsode 6 "Our Mrs. Reynolds" aired third, Episode 7 "Jaynestown" aired forth, Episode 8 "Out of Gas" aired fifth, Episode 4 "Shindig" aired sixth, Episode 5 "Safe" aired seventh, Episode 9 "Ariel" aired eighth, Episode 10 "War Stories" aired ninth Episode 14 "Objects in Space" aired tenth Episode 1 "Serenity" aired eleventh Episode 11 "Trash" never aired, Episode 12 "The Message" never aired Episode 13 "Heart of Gold" never aired.This is according to the order on the back of the DVDs. I can't wait to see how you justify THAT.

posted at July 25, 2006 12:05 AM

Rose wrote:

"Most shows don't" show the pilot first? What shows do you watch? Just curious.
And calling us "genre" fans is quite insulting. I never did like westerns.
Bad acting? I'm not sure what you're referring to.
No, I don't know anyone personally who does not like this show. I know a few that haven't seen it, but I don't know any who have seen it and hated it. Obviously they exist, but there are plenty of people who don't think Bob Dylan is a poet. Lots of people don't get Family Guy. But, as you said, the DVD sales for Family Guy are good.
The DVD sales for Firefly are very good, by the way. Years after its cancellation it's still ranked #23 on Amazon, with an average rating of five stars. Compare that to Family Guy volume 3, with a current ranking of #257 and a rating of four stars. Volume one is doing better with a ranking of #177 and a rating of four and a hlaf stars. How is this show, then, doing better than Firefly?
And the fact is, the fan support of this show was enough to have a movie made. Those who love it really love it.
And the "sold out" showings referred to were a few weeks ago, on June 23rd, charity screenings for Equality Now, which raised over $60,000 dollars.
I am a member of fireflyfans.net, and I've seen our numbers rise every day there. We now have more than 21,000 members. Compare that to almost any other fansite. One Tree Hill's biggest fan site has something like 5,000 members.
The fans are there, the support is there, and the love is there. Whatever your personal opinion that I very much disagree with might be, you can't deny how many people love this show, this movie, these characters and the actors who portray them, and the writers who made it all possible.

posted at July 25, 2006 12:34 AM

awkwardjonas wrote:

mlgm, I wasn't a fan of the show at all until quite recently. I watched the first few episodes and then walked away.

My friend sat me down and I spent one entire day at her house, watching the episodes in the proper order and fell in love.

The pilot wasn't over budget, nor past any deadline. FOX thought it was too long and boring. Whedon and Tim Minear had one weeked to write a shorter, more action packed pilot episode. The result was the Train Job, by far the worst episode IMHO.

Also...bad acting? You were watching the same show I was right? Just checking.

And yea, Fox promoted Firefly like there was no tomorrow. I remember the promos, and frankly they weren't very good.

I respect your opinion, you are entitled to one after all, and you expressed it intelligently, but the one thing I can not accept is someone so blind to the fact that Fox messed this one up. Fox does have good shows on it, it's not that bad of a TV station, but they messed up when it came to Firefly, simple as that.

Have a nice day.

posted at July 25, 2006 01:55 AM

tmonsta wrote:

I say this as a simple refute to the above

Yes I tuned in when firefly first aired. I've never been a Whedon fan, never watched Buffy or Angel. Could have cared less.

The shows I saw were heavy handed and lackluster, but then, here it is a few years later, and after being begged by a friend to give it another chance, and to watch it in order, I have to say, it's damn good stuff... no, not good, exceptional

Fox was stupid for not playing it in order, as when I watched the first episode, I had no clue who these people were or what was going on. Having seen them now in order, I bought my own set, and Serenity.

Fact is, Fox has never handled sci-fi well, from X-files overstaying it's welcome, to Strange Luck, Sliders Millenium John Doe etc. They either want to dumb it down, or action and sex it up... They don't get the audience, and the Fox formula is ratings hit, or gone in half a season...

Just glad FOX didn't get BSG.

I'm also pretty sure that the anti-theist view of many of the characters on the show didn't sit well with the bible beater fox execs (see fox news) and I'm sure that effected how they chose to handle the show.

this is one of those movies like Blade Runner and the original Trek. It will be a cult classic and a mainstay for a long time to come, and weirdly, it keeps getting a larger and larger audience...

mlgm, watch it in the order of airdates, then rewatch it in the order it was supposed to be aired... you think screwing up the introduction to characters might affect how an audience relates to a TV show?

posted at July 25, 2006 02:48 AM

zoid wrote:

I'm a 48-year old male. I remember feigning slumber and then sneaking from my bedroom to hide behind my father's recliner to watch the original "Star Trek" (I'm pretty certain he knew I was there). I remember the glory days of of "Gunsmoke", of "M.A.S.H.", of "Cheers". In short, I've seen a lot of television; but I've never seen anything that approaches the artistry of "Firefly".

The characters were realistically drawn, multifaceted, and worn like a second skin by the actors. The dialogue was witty, but not in the typical TV definition of 'witty': The characters were funny in the same way that you and I are funny, in our day-to-day lives. With characters and dialogue that are natural, humor that is *unforced*, "Firefly" is simply the best TV ever aired, and a paragon of dramatic virtues.

So, why did the *movie* fail? No one else will say it, but I will: It opened on the 30th of September, 2005, less than a month after Hurricane Katrina demolished the American Gulf Coast. Gasoline was $3.40 (an increase of $1.20) per gallon. Movie theaters -- and the malls surrounding them -- were literally ghost towns. Ever had to get out of your car to see if a Walmart was unexpectedly closed in the middle of a weekday, only to find that, nosir, we are *most definitely* open for business, and step right this way!? It was... Eerie.

A final thought: The movie industry is changing. Animation is cheaper than live action, so there's more of it. People can't afford to see as many movies in a theater as they'd like, due to high ticket and concessions prices. So, they wait for DVD releases, while many movies open and close within 2 weeks.

TV is likewise changing. With so many channels to choose from, the wheat frequently gets irrecoverably lost in a sea of chaff. And of course, there's the entire phenomenon of Shi-, er, 'Reality' TV.

Ergo, Hollywood desperately needs a new business model, and a new scheme for distributing their products. Producers, directors, writers and actors *desperately* want to create 'deep art' that touches people in the way that only moving pictures can. But, the ability to do so in today's economy -- and have it flourish in an entertainment-glutted culture -- is at an all-time ebb tide. The only things marketable are testosterone-or-estrogen and adrenaline fests.

...And I ain't keen on having my glands massaged while my wallet is lifted -- not my soul -- and Art is totally dismissed as unprofitable.

posted at July 25, 2006 03:05 AM

Colin Campbell wrote:

It's tough to take seriously any comments from a person who claims other people are ignorant, yet includes the sentence, "First, I know they didn't show the pilot first. Most shows don't."

You made some good points -- but c'mon, this one is way off base.

posted at July 25, 2006 04:08 AM

Ray wrote:

It puzzles me why certain people are so intent on rubbishing such a brilliant show as Firefly. Isn't there a little hypocricy from the above critics who accuse the shows followers of holding themselves superior? Has anyone here suggested you must be stupid if you don't like Firefly? But then compared to alot of the cr*p that seems to get shown on Fox, Firefly does require a fair amount of brain input to understand.
There's an accurate timeline for Firefly (which I'll do a search for) when it was originally screened back in 2002 and shows the total incompetence involved with it. Including preemting an episode with a re run of The Brady Bunch Reunion for absolutely no reason. Infact Fox did everything they could to discourage viewers from staying with it, yet the viewing figures actually began to increase. They commissioned another several episodes to be filmed and then cancelled it the very next day. Now there's a network that really knows what it's doing.
Firefly was the very 1st Whedon series I'd ever watched and I've never before been agrieved at the loss of a mere TV show, but when it was announced, on SciFiUK, that OIS was the final 'ever' episode... I was. I even spent £800 on a PC to get online and find out more about it.
I'll be honest, I don't like Buffy, sorry... but I don't. I have no interest in Angel either. They do nothing for me. But I'm certainly not going to visit a Buffy forum to say why I didn't like them and rub salt in the fact that Angel was cancelled. I just won't watch them or buy the DVD sets.
I also loath the Star Trek spin offs which I find duller than ditch water and are an insult to the original series, cast and crew. Again, I'll simply avoid watching them. I'm not going to visit a Star Trek forum and start explaining how bad they all were and why their precious franchise has ended.
As fans of this show, we want to bring it to as many people as possible, let them watch it, and let them decide for themselves.
It mostly seems to be disgruntled Trekkies and Star Wars fans who are intent in trying to stop that from happening.
Firefly is in the top 5 best ever selling TV to DVD boxsets so I think they have quite a job on their hands.

posted at July 25, 2006 07:37 AM

pisher wrote:

[quote]As for the movie Serenity, again for some "real" facts (from Boxofficemojo.com), the movie cost $39M to make and made $38.85M in worldwide boxoffice- very respectable and hardly a disaster financially- it made back what they spent.[/quote]

Okay, this is why it's so exhausting to argue about box office.

Let's assume the entire production budget was 39 million dollars, even though it was almost certainly more than that.

Let's assume that since the movie got an international release, the studio's total expenses, including promotion (there were ads on Monday Night Football), release, striking thousands of prints for a worldwide release, etc, their total expenses were around 80 million--that's being pretty damned conservative. The 39-40 mil you see listed is ONLY for production. And it may be a lowball figure. I heard it might be closer to 45mil. There's really no way to know for sure (even Whedon wouldn't know for an absolute fact, because he's a producer, not an accountant), but we can be pretty sure it's no LESS than 39mil--it was probably at least a little more, so we should probably say 40mil.

A movie studio gets around 55% of the total worldwide gross, on average (why do people keep thinking 100% of the money gets sent back to the studio?). That is to say, if the worldwide box office was 100 million dollars, they'd get back 55mil--60 mil tops. The total worldwide box office was 38.8 mil--anybody here good at figuring percentages? Let me save you the trouble--SERENITY FLOPPED.

The bottom line is that for a studio to even try to pretend a movie they released isn't a flop, its domestic gross has to at least equal what they claim the production budget was. They claim it was 39mil. Serenity didn't even make 39mil WORLDWIDE.

And that's why Joss Whedon has made it clear, over and over, that there aren't going to be any more Serenity movies. Because he knows if he brought it up with Universal, they'd never stop laughing.

posted at July 25, 2006 11:14 AM

zoid wrote:

Yo, pisher:

The majority of movies these days make their money in DVD sales and rentals, not theatrical runs. Take "Underworld", for a well-worn example. You're so knowledgeable, I won't even recount that tale except to say that a sequel got made strictly on the strength of DVD sales...

Firefly *will* return, either as a series/mini-series on SciFi/NBC, or as a theatrical release. I predict principal photography will begin as early as 3Q/2007, not later than 2Q/2008. Mark my words. My crystal ball has never failed yet, and it sure won't here; this one's a *slam dunk* (and a 'facial' for you)...

Cordially,
zoid

posted at July 25, 2006 03:21 PM

Dave wrote:

Dear Pisher: "Okay, this is why it's so exhausting to argue about box office." No, it's indescribably boring to have to argue against the idea "Box Office=Quality". By your standards, we can expect an Adam Sandler sweep at the next academy awards... good grief. Funny, I'm not aware of that having happened so far.

No one is saying Serenity didn't disappoint at the box office- that's kinda beside the point. We are simply saying Firefly was one of the best shows ever, and most of the critical evidence is on our side. And people yammering about, "Fox canceled it, and the movie tanked, so therefore Firefly stinks" is simply childish and uninformed.

Serenity was a "success" because it came very close to meeting it's modest expectations financially, and the people it was made for LOVED it- along with most (I said most) of the critics who saw it - a number of respected critics thought it was a better film than SW III. You want to talk flops? How about Poseidon, The Omen, Mission Impossible III - far below expectations, and the films themselves blew...

For that matter, The Matrix II & III: made some $$, but the fans HATED them . Most of the critics, too.

On the face of it, Firefly is a difficult proposition - why do they all look and talk like cowboys and frontier folk? Why does EVERYONE curse in Chinese? It's supposed to be Sci-Fi- where are the Aliens and laser beams? And yet the story arc, and the unique universe are very carefully crafted- anyone who is not profoundly moved as River Tam's story slowly comes to light , must have a heart of stone... it all makes perfect sense soon enough.

Keep an open mind, borrow the DVDs- or, if you must, rent Serenity I/II (pilot), Our Mrs. Reynolds, Jaynestown, Out of Gas, Ariel, Objects in Space- some of the best stand-alone episodes. This is a series, however, that richly rewards watching all of them, in order. Not to mention that the DVDs are widescreen and very cinematic.

posted at July 25, 2006 05:24 PM

pisher wrote:

zoid, you need to send your crystal ball to the shop for some finetuning. And Whedon himself would tell you that, if you asked him. Universal has no interest in doing another one, and Whedon himself is going to be tied up with Wonder Woman well past the dates you mention, assuming the project doesn't get shelved indefinitely, or Silver doesn't replace him, which I'm assuming you don't want to happen, but you never know with Browncoats. ;)

Will it make a small profit eventually, counting in DVD profits? You can't prove it, because those figures aren't available. It's certainly possible it'll earn a small profit when all the beans are counted, but a small profit doesn't get sequels made. A small profit is failure, because the movie biz is expensive, and you need large profits to cover the overhead. And Serenity's DVD profits were nothing special. It did great on Amazon (still does), but Amazon is only a small fraction of the overall market. In the realspace stores, its sales were mediocre at best. It wasn't one of the top-selling titles of the period it was released in. It disappeared quickly from the Billboard DVD sales chart.

As to Underworld--do you even bother to check up this stuff? Underworld has a listed budget of 22 mil, and made 95 mil worldwide. Serenity has a listed budget of 39 mil, and made less than that worldwide. And YET, the strong DVD sales (stronger than Serenity's) were still necessary to greenlight the sequel. Good point. Why didn't I think of that?

By the end of this decade, not one frame of a Serenity sequel will have been shot. If Whedon makes it big--REALLY big--and feels like failing again--he can always use his newfound clout to get another one made. So all the people who hate him, and want his career to end should encourage him to do precisely that.

posted at July 25, 2006 07:57 PM

Christina Arasmo wrote:

I saw the movie last year and loved it. Now that I have iTunes, I'm watching the series in the order intended. It's brilliant!

posted at July 25, 2006 09:01 PM

awkwardjonas wrote:

pisher, the total amount spent on the film was somewhere around $49 million that's filming and marketing together.

Serenity flopped in theatres. Universal did it's best to market it, but it's a tough film to market. And for that I think Universal did an amazing job.

But the DVD sales are skyrocketing. I don't know about sequels (We can only hope!) but Universal is definitely making their money back now.

posted at July 26, 2006 01:22 AM

pisher wrote:

awkwardjonas, you don't know the total amount, unless you're an accountant working for Universal. It's simply not possible they could have spent ten million dollars promoting and distributing a movie that was released in 18 countries, and flopped in all of them (Serenity actually did much worse in the UK than it did stateside, even allowing for the difference in population--the film's overseas performance was truly beyond pathetic).

Never mind that striking off prints alone costs millions, and isn't included in the production budget. No, sorry, but 49mil isn't correct. You have bad information. But even if you were right, the movie didn't come close to breaking even at the box office. Universal couldn't have gotten much more than 20 million dollars back from the total worldwide box office receipts. Maybe not even that. Most of their share of the DVD profits went to making up their b.o. losses, and paying off their investors (people tend to forget that nearly all movies are made with money borrowed at interest, and profits for the studio don't start until the investors are paid off).

Dave, I've had this argument about many other rotten failed movies, and I'm not surprised to hear the same tired arguments--"You're saying box office equals quality". No, I'm really not. But can we just accept this wasn't some arthouse indie? This was a commercial movie, and it was supposed to make money. Will it be remember as Great Art a hundred years from now? A better question would be will it be remembered at ALL.

But then you pull Adam Sandler on me. I hate to say it, but he probably WILL win an Oscar someday, though probably not next year.

But since you've just equated Oscars with quality, can I just ask--how many Academy Award nominations did Serenity get? How many Golden Globe Nominations? How many critic award nominations? Give up? The answer is 1)Zero., 2)Zero, and 3)One nomination from the Online Film Critics (oooh, so prestigious) for Fillion as "breakout performer" or something like that. He lost to the kid from "The Squid and the Whale". I doubt he was even in the running for third place.

Serenity got good reviews (many of which were not from the critics of record at various major newspapers, a large percentage of whom chose not to review it at all)--but not really great ones. It's not one of the 100 best-reviewed movies of 2005, according to Rotten Tomatoes. As far as 2005 movies in wide release went, it came in at #13--behind "Red Eye". So I guess that proves "Red Eye" is a timeless immortal classic that will stand the test of time? Reviews written by hack second-string critics on a deadline who are disproportionately likely to be Joss Whedon fans prove quality. Sure. Of course they do.

People can like what they like. But please--keep your sticky fingers off the facts. Firefly failed. Serenity failed. The promotion wasn't the problem. The product was the problem.

And anybody who thinks either qualifies as Great Art really needs to take a reality check.

posted at July 26, 2006 09:26 AM

zoid wrote:

pisher:
Done and done. I've bookmarked this page. I'll see you here, mid-2008. I'll bring the cheese, you bring the *whine*...

Knowingly,
zoid

posted at July 26, 2006 10:10 AM

pisher wrote:

zoid: Serenity WAS the cheese, and you've already brought the whine. :-D

posted at July 26, 2006 10:40 AM

Ray wrote:

Pisher, dude, you really need to get a hobby.

posted at July 26, 2006 01:52 PM

pisher wrote:

Wow. A Firefly fan is telling me to get a life. I may never stop laughing. :-D

posted at July 26, 2006 04:33 PM

Amber wrote:

"This was a commercial movie, and it was supposed to make money."

So you're saying that a movie without a single name based on a failed TV series was planned out by the brilliant minds at Universal to bring in the big bucks? That's an interesting theory.

The series was brilliant. The movie was brilliant. I know other people think so because it is listed on a website called Brilliantbutcancelled.com. It has managed to produce a growing number of dedicated fans despite Fox and Universal. People don't get it. People didn't get Van Gogh or Poe either. That doesn't make them ignorant it just means they don't necessarily appreciate that type of art. Stop going to fan sites and telling all the fans they are wrong.

posted at July 26, 2006 04:57 PM

PopsKrock wrote:

Pisher you are devoting way too much time to hate. Hate is not very constructive. Didn't you listen to Yoda.

posted at July 26, 2006 08:53 PM

DAVE wrote:

Pisher, you're gonna quote Rotten Tomatoes at me? Now you've gone & done it. Do your homework, my friend. Serenity's Rotten Tomatoes rating is 80% "Certified Fresh"! Out of 158 reviews, 127 "real" reviewers liked the film- only 31 did not.

'nuff said.

Here's a choice one from the Miami Herald: "A lot more sweaty fun than the last three overhyped, sterile, for-dorks-only Star Wars cartoons." Which I know you loved, 'cause they made a lot of coin.
"Serenity got good reviews (many of which were not from the critics of record at various major newspapers, a large percentage of whom chose not to review it at all)--but not really great ones."

Huh? it's cream of the crop rating is even higher- 87%. What are the cream of the crop reviews? From Rotten Tomatoes: " "Cream of the Crop" is where we place popular and notable critics from the top 20 US newspapers and top 5 Canadian newspapers by circulation. Popular magazine, web, TV, and radio critics are also included. This area has its own Tomatometer. Critics in this area are also accounted for in the overall Tomatometer."
In case you don't get it, these are the reviewers from: Salon.com, NY Daily News, Washington Post, NY Post, Village Voice, Ebert & Roeper, NY Times, LA Times.... on & on.

Pisher. Dude. They all liked the movie. And are more qualified to comment than you.

Case closed.

posted at July 26, 2006 09:07 PM

Dave wrote:

Sorry everyone, I just can't resist. My last post, I promise.

"Serenity is made of dubious but energetic special effects, breathless velocity, much imagination, some sly verbal wit and a little political satire." -- Roger Ebert, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

"Joss Whedon's unassuming science-fiction adventure is superior in almost every respect to George Lucas's aggressively more ambitious screen entertainments."-- Manohla Dargis, NEW YORK TIMES

"Whedon knows that he's blazing down a well-worn trail, but he addresses that by deftly adding elements of humor, action, romance and horror and continually confounding audience expectations."-- Kevin Crust, LOS ANGELES TIMES

Um, Pisher, you HAVE heard of at least a couple of these folks, yes?

posted at July 26, 2006 09:23 PM

Dog Surfer wrote:

So, Firefly left you yearning. Here's more that may be worth looking into. Consider the 2005 & 2006 seasons of the BBC Dr. Who. Also, Tim Minear, the executive producer of Firefly also produced "Wonderfalls", available on DVD. Neither of these are Firefly. Both are excellent, imaginative, fun, well written, and have enthusiastic fans.

posted at July 26, 2006 10:18 PM

John wrote:

From Wikipedia:

Serenity won film of the year awards from Film 2005[2] and FilmFocus.[3] It also won IGN Film's Best Sci-Fi, Best Story and Best Trailer awards and was runner up for the Overall Best Movie[4] (Batman Begins received first place). Won the 7th annual 'User Tomato Awards' for best Sci-Fi movie of 2005 at Rotten Tomatoes. It also won Nebula Award for Best Script for 2005. Serenity won the 2006 viewers choice Spacey Award for favorite movie.

posted at July 27, 2006 01:45 AM

netrunner wrote:

http://www.sliceofscifi.com (in the archives)

There's your proof that you say doesn't exist about the DVD sales, pisher.

The entire Star Wars prequel sucked HARD compared to Serenity. It just had George Lucas' clout and MASSIVE amounts of CGI and money.

posted at July 27, 2006 09:12 AM

pisher wrote:

netrunner, I'm almost sorry to have to be the one to break this to you--but if you'd only taken a closer look, you'd realize this brilliant financial analysis was written by some fanboy misinterpreting numbers on a message board. And on the Newsarama page where this misinformation first appeared, there's a link to Whedonesque, where better-informed people (who love Whedon to bits) basically took his figures to pieces. The studio's costs, above production, were obviously far higher than ten million, the and he was counting rental revenue that doesn't even go back to the studio. And the ten million for advertising was only for the U.S. It didn't include overseas promotion, not to mention distribution expenses, not to mention the striking of prints. Geez, man--you can't do a wide studio release in North America, and then distribute the movie in 18 foreign countries, for ten lousy million. And you know what the total take was for those 18 foreign countries? A little over 13 million.

http://whedonesque.com/index.php?comments=9577

The redfaced Mr. Fabb admitted he was totally wrong, and apologized.

Now would you care to do the same?

posted at July 27, 2006 10:52 AM

Obsidian wrote:

"he was counting rental revenue that doesn't even go back to the studio."

Must be a nice fantasy land you are living in.

Are you really really stupid enough to think that studios just GIVE AWAY their DVDs to rental places?

No. They don't. The retal place BUYS the DVDs to rent out, and the money for those copies goes to *shock**gasp* THE MOVIE STUDIO.

Furthermore, when the rental place sees that a movie is popular and well-requested, they tend to order additional copies of it which means that... wait for it... the movie studio gets even MORE money.

This is a simple equation that anyone capable of logical thinking could figure out. Too bad you aren't included in that company.

This is also one of the reasons why the DVD sales are so important. Because the studio makes money from every copy sold. And yes, even copies sold to video places. Your desire for that not to be the case doesn't make it so.

posted at July 28, 2006 12:04 AM

pisher wrote:

Dave, sorry to neglect you.

Yes, Serenity had a decent Tomatometer score--as did many another mediocre film, including many you despise, I have no doubt. You can say ROTS got a higher Tomatometer score because the critics took it easy on Lucas--well, that's how Serenity got such a high score--because the critics reviewing it were mainly fans of Joss Whedon--and in many cases, using their reviews less to review Serenity than to diss the recent Star Wars films. This little bit of critical schadenfreude didn't exactly help Serenity at the box office.

In spite of the fact that it was reviewed almost entirely by critics who went in sympathetic to Whedon and his failed franchise, at the end of 2005, there were over 100 movies with better Tomatometer scores. But Serenity was definitely in the Top 200. I'm sure Whedon brags about that frequently to his colleagues.

Roger Ebert gave Serenity three stars--the same rating he gave "Into the Blue", which came out the same weekend. You sure it was a good idea to bring that up? Get well soon, Rog.

Manohla Dargis is currently the #3 critic at the NY Times, which is certainly a prestigious position for a critic to hold--one of her senior colleagues gave Revenge of the Sith a great review, which I guess means it was a terrific movie?--you could say otherwise, but I suppose you'd have to admit this person is better qualified than you to comment. ;)

She did like Serenity--she also said it was less cinematic than the series (which she had been a fan of, unlike most people, but in fact most of the critics who reviewed Serenity admitted they were Whedon fans). In spite of her starry-eyed fandom, she said the actors 'borrowed rather than owned' the screen. She basically used the review to praise Whedon himself, while none-too-subtly suggesting he should go back to television where he belongs.

IMDb doesn't count most of the awards John mentioned, because they're mainly meaningless fanboy awards, determined by online voting, which can easily be rigged by a small but determined fanbase. They exist mainly to promote fansites, and bear no indusry prestige whatsoever--if Whedon mentioned them in the circles he moved in, he'd be mercilessly ribbed.

The Spacey award was determined by online voting--however, in the "Space Choice" category, where the people behind the awards pick the winner, it failed to win anything.

The Film Focus award was kind of weird--basically, they made up the award, which they had never given out before, so that Whedon would come and talk to them, which he did.

But the Nebula script award, which is a real award, recognized by IMDb, he didn't even show up to claim. Nor did he send anyone to claim it in his place. Nor did he send a written or videotaped acceptance speech. Even though he was contacted months in advance of the awards ceremony, and the only other competition he had in that category was two Battlestar Galactica scripts, and no teleplay has ever won that award. He did show up at the Saturn Awards to collect Summer Glau's best supporting actress award on her behalf.

Dave, I have to ask--if critics liked this movie so much, you'd think it would have garnered at least one or two critic awards--there are dozens of them across the country, and it received precisely one nomination--from the Online Film Critics. And it was for Fillion, and Fillion lost. And it was about the least important award the Online Film Critics give out. Oh yeah, Serenity was absolutely a critical fave.

Oh but that's right--you won't be posting on this forum again. You said so. ;)

posted at July 28, 2006 04:34 AM

pisher wrote:

Obsidian, why don't you click on the Whedonesque thread, and just read over the very reasonable critiques of Mr. Fabb's figures made by people who are bigger Firefly/Serenity/Whedon freaks than you'll ever be, and who wanted this movie to succeed more than anything.

Gossi (one of the film's biggest boosters online) says he thinks it might be in the black about two years after its release.

Rental revenue goes to the rental chains. Yes, of course the studio makes money--by selling DVDs to the chains. But will you please try to THINK for once? Okay, say Serenity took in ten million in rental fees. If the rental chains didn't spend a LOT less than that obtaining the DVDs from the studio, wouldn't that make Serenity a horrendous failure on DVD?

And in fact--it was. It did absolutely horrible rentals, and you can check that out at videobusiness.com, anytime you like.

The DVD did okay sales, horrible rentals, and Universal should have recouped their losses within a few years of releasing the film.

And Joss Whedon has made it very clear Universal isn't going to underwrite another film.

And this doesn't mean you didn't like the movie, or the series.

It just means most people didn't.

posted at July 28, 2006 09:33 AM

Elise wrote:

pisher, I really don't see why you care what we think. If you didn't like the show then thats fine, but there are a few people who loved it and you can't deny that. I don't know if it could have had better ratings with time, but I think it could have been possible. I just heard about this show like 3 months ago and didn't see it until about a week ago. So I don't see how it was promoted well. I watch the Fox station a lot, I always have. So I don't see how I missed advertising. When I saw previews for Serenity I was not interested, but then it was forced upon me and I really enjoyed it. Everyone I know and have mentioned the show/movie to say they have never heard of it. So how can you expect people to rent something they've never heard of. To most people it doesn't look appealing by the box cover, it didn't to me anyway and I love the show. Of course, I tend to like things that many people don't.
Ps,
If anything I said is something that was already said or something of that nature, I am sorry. I was trying to read all the posts but that was just taking way too much time and I just kinda skimed the rest.

posted at July 28, 2006 12:59 PM

Iris wrote:

I recently rented the movie hoping it would be worth it and if not it would be something to watch and help pass the time. To my surprise I loved it! My brother told me afterwards he'd heard that it was based on a cancelled show -- which I immediately purchased on Amazon along with the movie. No regrets on that decision, I've seen it a dozen times it seems, and I've only had it a few weeks.
Firefly is definitely the best show I've seen in a long time. It's brilliantly written, I love the cast, the opening song...I can't say enough about it. My only regret is that I didn't hear of it sooner...all that wasted time!

posted at July 28, 2006 09:11 PM

bbvdrone wrote:

I work at a rental store and Serenity was rented out completely for over a month when it came out. Unfortunatly we were only sent around 6 copies which meant tons of angry customers. Months later we were sent more copies but by then most of the "hey, this looks interesting" rush had died down. Most of the people who rented it had never even heard of the show but ended up going to the local indie store to rent it. We were never sent any copies of Firefly. My coworkers and I even talked about how badly handled the whole thing was. I have yet to meet a person who has watched the show (in order) who hasn't loved it, including people like me who can't stand Joss Whedon's other series. Personally I thought the movie was mediocre but trying to finish the storylines in two hours must have been grueling.
I guess I'm just trying to say that with the "smaller" titles, distribution controls rents more than you'd think.

posted at July 29, 2006 12:03 AM

deepgirl187 wrote:

Pisher, I (along with everyone else here) can see that you don't seem to like Firefly or Serenity. Fine. But why waste copious amounts of energy bashing it? The site name says "Brilliant But Cancelled Shows". Call me crazy, but I thought we were supposed to be here expressing our appreciation for shows we loved that met an untimely demise. Wouldn't it be just a tad more constructive to find a show you actually like and support it. You're not going to convince any of us that your right. We like Firefly for our own reasons, and all your really doing is being irritating.

posted at July 29, 2006 03:42 AM

Ray wrote:

Oh man. Pisher, what is it you're trying to achieve here? What is your motive for all this dissing & negativity? Are you really (as has been suggested) a devoted Star Wars fan boy? A disgruntled one? Just like mlgm, wouldn't be surprised if you're both the same person. As Mac said earlier, his posts -just like yours- smack of desperatley trying to convince people that Firefly & Serenity are scifi of the lowest quality and are not worth our time and money.
Geeze, for you to go to all this trouble, submitting all those boring overly long posts, this little series and subsequent big screen follow up must really be a serious threat to your precious Star Wars franchise. Why else would you be here.
If your trying to convince anyone new not to bother watching the movie or the series, I think I can safely say that your increasingly obsessive posts will be having the opposite of the desired effect. There is after all only one kind of bad publicity, and that's 'no publicity'.
Thankyou, I've enjoyed watching your credibility ebb away with each successive post.

posted at July 29, 2006 09:41 AM

kaelor03 wrote:

When I first saw the ads on Fox for Firefly, I didn't have any interest in a Whedon made show set in space. And I love SciFi, so I should have given it a chance. I didn't. Until I found some references to it on websites, long after it was cancelled, and followed up on those ref's. After that, I decided to Kazaa the episodes and watch them. I was really surprised at the quality of the series. I enjoyed it and when the DVD's came out, bought a set. My friends never watched it either. I preached to them the virtue of the show, and eventually they all watched it too and loved it just as much. Some of them saw Serenity first and thought it was good, then watched the series. Either way, they liked it too.

posted at July 30, 2006 10:52 AM

Mar wrote:

Great show. It's a shame that they cancelled it after so short a run.

posted at July 30, 2006 04:24 PM

pisher wrote:

Ray, I didn't even go see Attack of the Clones (gee, that would have been a good title for Serenity) when it was in theatres, and I waited months to see Phantom Minus and ROTS. I've enjoyed some of the Star Wars movies (like about 90% of the planet), but I found the prequel trilogy deeply flawed and disappointing, and even the first two films are not the masterpieces some people think. George Lucas is massively overrated, but at least he doesn't suck up to his pathetic fans the way Whedon does. If you want to find my cinema idols for purposes of petty childish frustrated revenge, you'll have to go back a lot further than that, kid. ;)

Now let me just check your last post--don't remember which one you were--oh right--hmm. Seems to me you were less interested in praising Firefly/Serenity in your boring overly long posts than you were in bashing Star Wars and Star Trek fans for liking what THEY like. And this, of course, is the classic Browncoat double standard.

I like Star Wars films when they're good, which the last four were not. I like Star Trek shows when they're good, which the last two shows were not. I actually decide what's good or bad based on the show/film itself, as opposed to who made it. Too radical a concept fer ya? ;)

I was hoping Firefly would be good, because I was a big fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (for its first five seasons, anyway). It wasn't good, and I said so. And the only reason I'm still talking about it now is that I ran into a wave of nigh-religious intolerance that rivals that of the Taliban and the Moral Majority. I had heard from some online friends that Whedon fans were the worst nutballs on the internet, and that they made the most freaked out Trekkies look normal by comparison--but I never believed it. Not until I saw the online temper tantrums that greeted Firefly's perfectly understandable and inevitable demise.

Then I watched you guys gloat about how Serenity would prove FOX was wrong to cancel the show. Well, gee--how'd that work out?

The reason so few people watch this franchise is that most people don't enjoy it. All the online testimonials in the world don't undo the fact that it failed TWICE. Once at 20th Century Fox. Once at Universal. Bad luck? Bad promotion? Or just a bad BAD idea? Universal obviously favors the third option.

The reason Browncoats are so despised by other genre fans is that they attacked other fanbases for no reason--and made enemies for Firefly/Serenity, and for Whedon himself. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen Serenity fans spoken of contemptuously at various spots online. Frankly, if you'd just SHUT UP about the damned movie, it might have done a little more business.

Oddly enough, when you slam Star Wars and Star Trek online, you don't get flamed nearly as much--gee, could that be because fans of those franchises feel just a TEENSY bit more secure about their future? ;)

posted at July 31, 2006 08:36 AM

pisher wrote:

Oh, and deepgirl, I did notice the title of this forum is 'brilliant but canceled'--did you notice the subtitle is 'pop autopsy'?

Generally speaking you do autopsies on dead things.

Call me crazy, but I thought the purpose of a discussion thread was for people holding differing opinions to--you know--discuss them?

I'm having a hard time thinking of anything more pointless than yet another thread where fans of a failed TV show get together to talk about why it shouldn't have been canceled. It WAS canceled. The movie DID flop. And don't say "We accept that", because obviously some people on this thread still haven't accepted it.

Firefly is dead. Serenity is dead. Neither was much of a loss. Don't tell me to let it go, when you're obviously still unwilling to follow your own good advice. ;)

posted at July 31, 2006 10:09 AM

nonny wrote:

After I saw the complete boxed Firefly episodes, I quickly became an ardent fan. While awaiting the movie Serenity, I would log into a movie review website(IMBD, I believe). (Forgive my memory, I'm battling early senility.) There was one person who posted under numerous names who delighted in bashing Firefly and Serenity and who used box office figure quotes and the word "flop" continually. The sole purpose of these posts seemed to be to goad the fans. I suspect "Pisher" has resurfaced here. The best way to handle it is as it is with all "bullies"-ignore and don't comment!!!! Nonny( to the site owner_feel free to edit if I have incorrectly named the movie review web site).

posted at August 1, 2006 09:28 AM

pisher wrote:

For the record, I did post some negative comments about Serenity at IMDb. I didn't post under multiple names, though--I've only posted at IMDb under one name. There were many other people who posted negative comments about that movie, and who do so to this very day. I know it's a fond delusion of Browncoats that there were just a tiny handful of 'trolls' who disliked the movie, but the box office would tend to belie that. And I'd be fine with people ignoring me here--which sure isn't what 'nonny' has done. ;)

posted at August 1, 2006 12:13 PM

s wrote:

You know, I'm not one for box office receipts, which seems to be a focus of a lot of the controversy on this thread. All I know is that Firefly spoke to me in a way most TV shows don't. The characters were well drawn, the dialogue snappy, and the premise interesting. I grew up on both Bonanza and Star Trek reruns (and loved both of them) so you can imagine my delight in the series. I tend to agree that Fox didn't do such a hot job in handling Firefly. I was a huge Buffy fan when it came out, and when I heard Joss was doing another series, I danced with joy and got my remote ready. Unfortunately, I was disappointed by what happened. Oh, not with the show itself, but how the show was presented. The promos didn't really give all that tantalizing a glimpse into what Firefly was really about. And don't even get me started on the order they showed it in. How can you gain fans quickly (as is Fox's mission in life) if you don't give them a chance to understand what it is they're seeing? Now, I understand Firefly may not be for everyone. But I resent the implication that because one person may not like it (okay, that was a passive aggressive jab at pisher, I admit it. I'll stop doing that now.) that the series is without value. Now, I'm not saying Joss Whedon is the Second Coming or anything, but I do believe that he made something beautiful in Firefly. And to address the issue of Serenity and its success, I have one thing to say: I don't really care how it did at the box office. A film's box office receipt does not its quality tell. It tells of its marketability and very little else. I mean, if we go by box office receipts as out measuring rod for whether a movie is good or not, movies such as Waterboy would be winning Oscars. A film may be underappreciated and still be good and worthy of praise. I understand that people dislike Firefly and Serenity, and more power to them! But to insinuate that another's opinion is invalid simply because it differs from yours is ludicrous. I have no problem with anyone disliking my fandom. What I do have a problem with is people telling me I shouldn't like it myself. So, I guess what I mean to say by that is that while discussion and varying opinions are a vital and necessary part of a healthy intellectual diet, sometimes you just have to shut up and eat your metaphorical brussel sprouts. Even if you hate them.

posted at August 2, 2006 02:19 AM

Rowan wrote:

All hail Joss Whedon. I'm a HUGE Buffy fan. Season 1 through 7. You HAVE to love them all. (ok, well Season 4 was kinda...ewww.) when Firefly came out I admit I wasn't into it. I went to see the movie with my in laws and I LOVED it. The strong character yet crushing vulnerability of River Tam...shades of Buffy. The brutal and quick killing of a main character (can't remember his name..but he drove the ship) shades of Anya's quick and shocking demise at the end of Buffy.
I'm glad Joss got to wrap up the story in a movie after the show got cancelled. Do you realize he wrote Buffy season 1 - 7 before the pilot even aired? He writes a story..he weaves webs of intricate measure in his work. That is what makes him the genius that he is.

posted at August 2, 2006 04:13 AM

Ray wrote:

Thankyou Nonny, Amen to that. Just for a giggle though, type "Pisher Firefly" & or "Serenity" into google. At Scalzi.com/whatever (Yes he's there too) you'll find a link to another forum where Pisher has around 130 posts 'mostly to himself', and this is dating back to last year. I rest my case. Bye all.

posted at August 2, 2006 04:52 AM

pisher wrote:

::chuckle:

So only one person didn't like Firefly or Serenity.

And that's why Firefly was canceled less than halfway through its first season, and Serenity couldn't even manage 39 million dollars in 20 countries, including the U.S. and Canada. That's why Serenity didn't even manage to make five million dollars in the UK, where there was supposedly a huge rabid fanbase for it, and the PR campaign was reportedly quite good. It made a little over half a million dollars in France--they must have spent more than that promoting and releasing it there. Most of the overseas releases probably lost money for Universal.

I'm not even the only person on this THREAD who didn't like it.

And geez, that thread at scalzi has been dead for months now. I'm literally not talking about Firefly/Serenity anywhere else on the internet but this thread. And I'll go right on talking about it here, as long as you keep talking about me. So guess who's to blame for my continued presence? As always, the Browncoats prove to be their own worst enemies. :-D

posted at August 2, 2006 08:31 AM

Scott Ellington wrote:

I like the fact that pisher provides an alternate view of the failure of SereniFly. Having been addicted only since last February, I've no valid opinion regarding the promotional efficacy of television networks I don't care to watch (four years ago).
I think the numbers measure popularity of a couple of media in wild transition, and that I've spent a hell of a lot of money since February following up on leads and allusions scattered throughout the series and the film.
That the video card, the books and the 95 DVDs I've purchased (since somebody loaned me his copy of Serenity) have NO recognized impact on the BDM's bottom line is unfortunate. The fact, nonetheless, is that NOW I measure everything I see against the standards set by SereniFly.
My bottom line is that the movie is shockingly great, and that the series is of significantly greater value than I can express.
Clearly, the numbers really DO matter, but the scales are in fundamental flux, and the people who use them to make important, executive decisions aren't looking for quality or inspired/inspiring art so much as popularity and big bucks. Caveat pre-emptor; networks also have the right to be wrong.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:18 AM

pisher wrote:

My bottom line is that I've seen literally thousands of better movies in my life. I simply do not understand why a tiny handful of people refuse to accept that the fact that this franchise tickled their fancies (and their vanities) more than anything else they've seen recently doesn't mean that it's great art. It simply means they need to get out more.

Joss Whedon says there's no more coming, so enjoy what you got.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:50 AM

Giselle wrote:

As a huge fan of Joss Whedon and probably one of the only original viewer of Firefly I personaly thought that the show and the movie were briliant. The whole soci-political commentary of the lengths a Society will go thru to make there people conform to what they deem is right is the most masterful script writing I have ever come across. Browncoasts Forever!

posted at August 2, 2006 07:28 PM

Jennifer wrote:

Through my entire college career I had a blue glove pinned to my front door of my dorm room... It always made people ask what it was for... I'd invite them in to watch an episode of Firefly and they were hooked. In a college of only about 2,000 people, most of the dorms knew about Firefly by my senior year. I saw Serenity five times in theater. This is the most amazing show/movie that I've ever seen. The cast and everyone involved in the making of it all, especially Joss Whedon are simply brilliant. If you believe in something, hold onto it until it grows wings, because something like Firefly could have really had the chance to fly.

posted at August 2, 2006 07:44 PM

Chad Huffman wrote:

Is someone seriously talking about the box office as a litmus test of quality? Is it not now common knowledge amongst intelligent persons that the masses are incredibly stupid? Don't Britney Spears' pregancy photos and Brangelina's baby encompass 90% of what the average American cares about? Firefly (and Serenity by extension, though to a lesser extent) is classic Joss, which is to say Brilliant Entertainment. I capitalize both of those words for the combination of meanings they bring forth. They are campy and pop-culture relevant, as Buffy and Angel were, but--much like both aforementioned series--they have relevant, meaningful characters and situations that put forth more engaging and emotive moments than any dozen box-office successes of the past several years. Barring a small handful of commercially successful TV programs and movies, there is little of substantive quality on celluloid these days. Firefly and Serenity as a package give you characters you can care about, stories that can entertain, dialogue that can make you laugh and cry, and a world that tickles the imagination. Anyone who fails to see the value in this franchise is the one who loses, not the rabid fans who recognize its greatness.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:23 PM

Erika wrote:

OK, pisher, I can understand that you didn't like the show/movie, but I have some serious issues with what you say. First of all, I don't quite understand why you seem to devote so much time to something you don't like. Are you so insecure that you need to continuously mock people who like things you don't? It's a television show, for crying out loud! I love TV (which, by the way is what this forum is about; the TV show, not the movie) as much as the next person, probably moreso, but it's not something to get that worked up about.

My real problem, however, was your following comment: "I didn't even go see Attack of the Clones (gee, that would have been a good title for Serenity)..."
What, exactly, is Serenity a "clone" of? Like it or don't, criticize the acting or the writing or it's "success" (or lack thereof, which, as has been pointed out, is NOT a measure of quality, although neither are award shows), but I haven't seen anything like it, before or after. I can't see how you can justify calling it a clone of anything. It may have failed in the economic sense, and you (and others) may not have liked it, but it was original.

I could say a lot more, but quite frankly, I have better things to do than argue with someone who has nothing better to do than argue about a TV show.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:24 PM

Marie wrote:

I tried reading al of the comments, I really did. Tehn halfway through I just got sick of the bickering.

I like Firefly, and yes, that's present tense. I still haven't seen all of the episodes, let alone in order. Still, it's an entertaining show and I love the characters.

It's quirky and it's not for everyone. There is no way I can pinpoint why exactly I like it, but I do. That may be a large part of the problem with getting this series (and movie) out there, because it is hard to sum it all up nicely.

And perhaps advertising was an issue. Personally I don't remember seeing anything for it, but then again I never did watch FOX very much. When they started to air House I didn't get into it because of their focus on the drama, not the characters. Now I'm a big House fan because I saw the right advertising for me (on USA), and the show matched those commercials.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:32 PM

Ithyrin wrote:

IMHO, fans post to this and similar site because they miss the series they loved and lost. Misery loves company and talking about Firefly with other fans is consoling.

So what's with the repeat trollish posters? I think it's either a kind of cowardly sadism--like torturing your little brother by reminding him how his teddy got left in the motel and it's probably in the garbage.... Or it's a kind of libertarian fundamentalism: Thou Shalt Love Only What the Market God Rules Worthy!

Loved the original Trek for years and years. It gets harder to watch as the world has changed so since I first loved it. Loved Twin Peaks, DS 9 and, after years of dismissal, Buffy when I let myself finally watch it. Now I'm a Whedon freak and of course I love Firefly and Serenity.

The western theme threw me at first. I've never accepted the theory I've heard (mainly from people who hate Sci-Fi) that Sci-Fi is just a cowboy movie in strange clothing. I never liked westerns much, except a brief period when I had a crush on a rider in High Chaparral. And I had trouble with Caleb as Mal because I really hated his misanthropic behind in Buffy Season 7. But I got past both those obstacles after 5 minutes of Firefly (Netflix-in order).

So to all those who miss it, I give you the words of Thornton Wilder, from The Woman of Andros: "You were happy with her once; do not doubt that the conviction at the heart of your happiness was as real as the conviction at the heart of your sorrow."

That's way over the top for a cancelled show...but it's the thought that counts. Sorry for the long post.

posted at August 2, 2006 09:39 PM

ixidro wrote:

I wasn't introduced to Firefly until after the series was cancelled. I was able to watch the series DVDs before the movie came out, and I was hooked by episode 3 or 4 (in order).

I can't say how thrilled I would've been about the show had I been forced to see it out of order and having to hunt it down to watch the show. I probably would've given up on trying to see it. (Bless you, Tivo, now I don't have to.) They do the same garbage to other TV shows, and not many survive it.

I also happen to be a relatively big Star Wars fan compared to most people. (I bring up SW only for a timeline comparison to make a point. I'm not going to debate how good or bad SW is here.)

I have no difficulty with saying that I believe that Whedon's story plans for the entire Firefly series (of which he wrote out the main plot points for multiple seasons in advance before he shot any of the TV show, if I heard correctly) might be one of the most masterfully told stories and beautifully crafted universes ever to exist, if we ever get to see the whole story that is. Why bring up SW? I think Firefly (and Serenity, which I've heard was essentially the main plot for season 2 of Firefly) has the potential to be as great and as remembered as Star Wars. And I think Firefly was cancelled before it reached its prime.

If George Lucas had made 'The Phantom Menace' first, we'd have likely never known the whole story because 'Menace' wasn't strong enough alone to get you interested in the characters to see what happens next. Lucas started in the middle of the story, not the beginning. The beginning is setup and setup can take a while sometimes before a story comes into its own. In the case of SW, the story didn't really get into the heart of the matter until Ep 3.

I'm not suggesting that people judge Firefly for "what it could have been", because we could go on endlessly about that. I'm simply saying that it was still in 'setup' phase, so take that for what it's worth. Should it have gone faster with its setup? Debate that all you like, but it's another moot point. It is what it is.

So, I can live with the people who dislike Firefly for whatever reason. Your opinions differ from mine, and people with strongly held opinions seldom change them once they're made. I don't think Fox did Firefly justice by making the plot harder to follow by re-arranging episodes and changing airtimes and skipping dates. Note that the same thing happened to '24', but it's still on the air though, so there obviously wasn't something in the mix for Firefly that it needed to maintain. Therefore, there are correct arguments for both sides of this coin.

However, I hope someday to understand River's fear of 'two-by-two, hands of blue'.

http://www.fireflyseason2.com/

posted at August 2, 2006 10:40 PM

Nara wrote:

I've been a huge fan of Firefly from the beginning, even though I've never really been one for SciFi or Westerns. But I was sorely dissapointed by the movie. It was far too action oriented for my taste. In my oppinion, they did not tie up any plot threads, let alone all of them, they only created more that will sadly never be dealt with. Although if I had to choose between nothing and another dissapointment like Serenity I'd choose nothing in a heartbeat.

posted at August 2, 2006 10:44 PM

Emily wrote:

A friend of mine bought the box set to the show. I watched every episode at least three times. The dialouge is amazing and less superficial then most crap shows out now adays and it is sad, but not surprising that it was canned. But at least I never had to say "remember season one? It was soo good what happened?!"

Ok so I dont actually think that was what happened. Anyway Great show totally worth watching. Enjoy

posted at August 2, 2006 11:56 PM

Kalani wrote:

"It simply means they need to get out more" - Pisher.

:chuckles in return:
um, who had the time to argue point after point, even research other peoples "bad" information, just to say he didn't like anything? go play dungeons and dragons and let people enjoy something without fear of cynical, (and hypocritical) commentary. We just wanted to have fun talking about something we love and hope for more. We don't need you telling us there isn't any, even if there isn't.

posted at August 3, 2006 12:02 AM

kestrel wrote:

Firefly was a great show, but it never found an audience. Fox screwed it up, but Fox has always had difficulty introducing new shows because of the World Series. Fox didn't help matters by messing the order of the show, but its hard to say if it would ever have found a big enough audience to keep it alive. If Firefly was released today on the Sci-Fi channel, it would probably find an audience and stay on the air for four or five years. While I loved Firefly, I thought Universal was insane for making Serenity. I wasn't surprised that it didn't make any money. Of course, I loved the movie. I kinda felt like Wheedon pulled a fast one on Universal. Good for him.

Serious sci-fi is a hard sell. One of the best and most influential sci-fi movies of the past 40 years (Blade Runner) was ignored by audiences, slammed by critics and messed with by its studio. While I think BSG is the best show on television it will probably never consistently attract more than 3 million viewers a week. BSG would never survive on network tv. It doesn't matter how many Peabodys it wins.

Firefly was part serious Sci-Fi, part western, and part ensemble drama. That's an even tougher combo to sell to audience that was being forcefed reality television at the time. Firefly was truly brillantbutcancelled.

Pisher, your entitled to your opinion, but I have hard time believing that you have seen thousands of movies or Sci-Fi movies better than Serenity. If you are comparing movies, you have to stay in the same genre. As much as you may want to compare The Third Man, the General or Citizen Kane to Serenity, you can't. It's apples and oranges. I think Serenity compares very well with classic sci-fi movies such as The Day the Earth Stood Still, Forbidden Planet, and Blade Runner. It's a good sci-fi movie and I think it will age well. Pisher, how about you tell us why you think Firefly and Serenity do a disservice to the Sci-Fi genre. Give us an idea what you think good sci-fi is, cite some movies or television that you think represents the gold standard for sci-fi. Mabe then, we can have an actual discussion about the merits of Firefly and Serenity and its place within the sci-fi genre.

posted at August 3, 2006 12:29 AM

pishaw wrote:

please, pisher, don't leave us! if it's true what you say, that you won't stop ranting about firefly, serenity, or joss whedon, until we stop talking about you, well then, you wish is our command!
by far, your detailed, descriptive, denigrating anti-serenity posts are truly the cream of the crop!
who wants to read about how they liked the show, when they can read how much you hate it? everyone must have come here, and continues to come here, to read YOU pisher!!
wait...are you trying to convince anyone of anything? i must have missed that bit of drool coming from your typewriter, because it sure isn't working! 'pop autopsy' or not, you truly are wasting your talents here! maybe hollywood needs a script titled 'how i became truly condescending'!
it could star...YOU!!

posted at August 3, 2006 02:32 AM

starlet wrote:

Pisher, I do not understand why you keep bashing Serenity and the people that love it. You've made your point. We get the fact that you didn't like it, nor do you like us. Wonderful, now move on. And let the rest of us enjoy something we love without you telling us that we're stupid and that our opinions don't matter. Because even if they don't matter to you, they obviously matter to some people. Otherwise there wouldn't be a site like this, a following this large (even though you call it a tiny handful), or a movie that was made after the tv series was cancelled.
And I would like to point out, because I just can't help myself, is the fact that you continually make jabs at us by telling us that we don't have lives and the we need to get out more, when you are spending a great deal of time and energy on this. You've checked in everyday, sometimes several times a day, for at least the last week to write a comment on this blog (it could very well go much further than that, but I didn't check). So I suggest that YOU get out more in order to live your obviously fascinating life and leave the rest of us to our existence that you find to be so incredibly boring.
Now on a much more pleasant note, Firefly ROCKS!! :) I have to say that I'm not a sci-fi person by any stretch of the imagination, and I love-LOVE this series and the movie. I was somewhat ambivalent to it at first because I wasn't much of a Buffy fan. I appreciate Buffy, but wouldn't be classified as a die-hard fan. But I thought that Firefly was incredibly original and vastly entertaining. One would think that cowboys in space wouldn't work at all, but they go surprisingly well together at least in the imagination of Joss Whedon. The show and movie were humorous and really moving, though they succeeded in doing so without taking itself too serously. It makes me extremely happy that there are so many others that feel the same way.

posted at August 3, 2006 02:40 AM

Daniel Vandersall wrote:

It's so very rare to find a good sci-fi series; probably the hardest thing to find on TV. While there are some very good ones out there, like the new "Battlestar" and (in some people's opinion) the array of "Stargate" shows, I've always been dismayed by the fact that none of them have been successes. Not really.
Keep in mind that even "Star Trek" failed in the short-term--three seasons. Only the devotion of its fans saved the show from becoming just another cancelled series.
I won't badmouth Fox network too much--but if they're hiring, I have actual taste. Where do they get their focus groups--trailer parks? Apparently their opinion of television viewership is the lowest common denominator is always the best choice--and sadly, the ratings of "So you think you can dance" or "Idol" seem to bear that out.

Sci-Fi channel--if you could get these actors and the writers--this could be a jewel in your crown...

posted at August 3, 2006 04:56 AM

tom wrote:

i don't like westerns
i don't like spacey shows
i never really got into buffy or angel properly
but i loved firefly.
i watched it on dvd (thankfully) and it was incredible.
for one very short lived show to change a persons views completely on like 3 things is pretty damn good.
and as for whoever said the advertising of the film in england was apparently quite good, living here myself i can say it wasn't great at all. A short advert on tv shown every now and then isn't "good" advertising.
oh well atleast i can look back on my dvds and watch them knowing that i've seen something very special indeed.

posted at August 3, 2006 07:11 AM

Solaris wrote:

Firefly was a great 50's B-movie Western dressed up like a Sci-fi show. It seems, from the 13 shows we have, that Whedon was working in elements from other genres [romantic comedy, government conspiracy thrillers, oppressive sci-fi dystopias] to tell a larger story similar in style and depth to the one from Babylon 5 but was not given the time to develop those threads.

Lots of reasons [shows out of order, too many people in the cast, No hit show lead-in to buy it time to develop, constant shifting/pre-empting of time slot, etc.] all give clues that FOX exec. didn't really get this show. To be fair they are not in the business of "getting" shows but making money for investors so getting angry with them or thinking of them as something evil is kind of pointless. All they really wanted and expected was something more like a hip, ironic Star Trek crossed with the a sexy O.C. kind of thing and hoped to get it from the same guy who wrote a coming of age drama and dressed it up like a supernatural suspense/Dawson's Creek/hip-young show. Looks like the execs. thought "Blasters and Whedon, what more do we need to sell it?"

The show just did not deliver the Fox vision of it nor, alas, on the dollars they were spending on it and they axed it. I am glad they at least took it out of devlopement and took a chance on it. For me and millions of others [as can be attested by DVD sales] the show was good stuff and lots of fun. I am just glad it got aired and I have my box set of DVD's.

BTW, on the topic of evil, phisher, dude, if all you want to do is spend your days watching the BBCancelled boards and pulling the dusters off browncoats, as it were, then you can have the last word and be much smarter than the rest of us. I guess.

posted at August 3, 2006 07:54 AM

Scott Ellington wrote:

A guy named Malcolm attacked a place called Dunsinane with an army cloaked in the guise of Birnam Wood.
Another Malcolm brought to bear the hostile denizens of the Burnham Quadrant on the defenders of a guilty governmental secret.
Distrusting the chain of command, John Reynolds didn't accept Lincoln's offer to lead the Army of the Potomac against Lee's Army of Northern Virginia prior to the Battle of Gettysburg. (I'm not holding out for a sequel.)
That battle inspired Michael Shaara's book, The Killer Angels, that inspired both Ken Burns and Joss Whedon to do what Murrow told us the medium of television Can do...and usually Doesn't...TEACH.
The belief that Firefly and Serenity are a couple of dead ends may be entirely true, but they came from fascinating works of art that are highlighted everywhere in the series and the movie, whetting appetites.
As I've learned more about SereniFly, unexpected interests have proliferated, and two of the people who taught Joss, Jeanine Basinger and Richard Slotkin, are famously in print. Tons of avenues for exploration present themselves between premiers of the works of Whedon.
"Follow the money", is great advice in most pursuits, but everybody knows there's no payday at "the end" of a satisfying education.
And maybe that's why Firefly didn't (fly and pay off for The Suits). Maybe it was just too good for us, like green, leafy vegetables and homework.

posted at August 3, 2006 08:49 AM

Noelle wrote:

I dont see how anyone could suggest that either Fox or Universal "promoted" this movie or television show.

I had NEVER HEARD of it. Never seen a trailer for the movie or a promo for the television show until serenity was actually in theatres. And it was brought to my attention by a flyer. A flyer that a browncoat had made giving directions to his "Serenity Viewing Party." I couldn't attend the party, so my first introduction to the series was when my husband recieved the DVD set of the show for Christmas this past year.

I was hooked.

My husband and i have proceeded to introduce our friends and family to Firefly, and no one who has seen it has not enjoyed it. In fact only one person was not LOVED it.

Perhaps, just perhaps, it is a fault of marketing, and not one of quality? I know that is a controversial point of view with some people here...but just thought i would throw that out there.

Also, i wonder if *some* people here have seen the movie? or the show? or did they just watch 30 minutes of The Train Job, get confused, and leave?

posted at August 3, 2006 08:58 AM

red_and_brown wrote:

This is the only thing I'm going to say (for now, anyway) - there was a comment waaay up there that said something about Fox giving Firefly plenty of money. My question for this person (and hopefully it will be pisher, so that I can have it answered) is this: why did they (Firefly costumers) have to rent Starship Trooper costumes for the Alliance in "Train Job" if Fox was supposedly giving them so much money?

Oh, and by the way, I love the show. I love the movie. And, nothing you ever do or say will make me change my mind.

posted at August 3, 2006 09:41 AM

Seth H wrote:

This has to be the best Sci-Fi show of all time! The great mix of humor, drama, and western is awesome! I hope somebody will bring it back!

posted at August 3, 2006 10:48 AM

Alatariel97 wrote:

Firefly is one of those shows that can appeal to a lot of different people. Writing, acting, concept.. . it was all brilliant. I was hooked from the moment I saw the pilot. Kept me going with a sense of "What's going to happen next?" all the way up to Objects in Space (the last episode chronologically), where I had to remind myself that, sadly, there was no more. Why, exactly, will never be completely certain. I know who I like to blame (*cough* FOX *cough*). I love Firefly and I love Serenity. That being said, I know that there are people who don't. Sci-fi just doesn't appeal to some people and for others, Firefly mightn't be their cup of tea. OK. Fine. I don't really care all that much. I'm not going to shove info down their throats to convince them otherwise. That also being said, I would expect that they would do the same for me, and not try to convince me that the show I love is a piece of crap and a failure.

Firefly had such a brilliant cast. They completely sucked me into their world. I wish there could be tales of further adventures. For instance, what's Shepherd Book's real background? Will Mal and Inara ever get together? Will River ever fully recover? The storylines are limitless, and I mourn the fact that they may never be explored. Firefly was just amazing. It was more than amazing. It was SHINY.

posted at August 3, 2006 10:52 AM

pisher wrote:

Way too many comments to respond to.

So I'll leave it at this.

It's true that a lot of good shows and movies flop--so do a lot of bad shows and movies, ALL of which have 'rabid fans' (hey, a Browncoat said it, I merely repeat it) who are convinced it's great art, and that all the people who dislike it are mindless plebes. And you've all taken shots at these people. Well, guess what--you ARE these people.

You want to seek vindication for this failed franchise by shouting me down? Gee--guess that means you think being in the majority is cool.

How ironic.

:-D

posted at August 3, 2006 11:38 AM

ManySkills wrote:

I remember searching and failing to find promotion for the Firefly Movie in the local papers. Every other movie had a big stirring picture and plaudits from the critics. How was anyone to even know this movie was coming out?

Similarly, every time I asked someone at work if they were going to see the movie, or if they had already, invariably the answer was - 'Serenity? Never heard of it'.

Someone, I don't know enough about the industry to know who precisely, chose not to invest the same big bucks in the promotion of this movie as they do for other movies.

It did not compete on a level playing field. Doomed from the start unless you were already a fan.

posted at August 3, 2006 02:04 PM

Chud wrote:

I would like to start by saying that I am not (in general) a big fan of television. I would also like to add that, prior to April of this year, I had absolutly no experience with internet fan sites, chat rooms, or discussion groups.

I am a fan of Firefly. I watched Serenity in the theaters, I saw bits of the show when it first aired, I own both the series and the movie on dvd.

Now, having said all this, I would like to point out that both the major view points expressed in this forum have some merit.

Yes, the series and the movie have a very loyal following (and I include myself in this group). Yes, I think it would have been nice if the show had not been canceled. Yes, I would like to see more of this story.

The sad fact is that the show was canceled because Fox (for whatever reason) did not feel that they could make a profit. I also realize that the movie did not do well enough at the box office to warrant a sequel.

Now, those of us who are fans can complain that the suits didn't show the episodes in sequence, that the movie didn't receive enough promotion, that it wasn't given enough of a chance.

But in the end I think that we ought to realize that the entertainment industry is, in fact, an industry not a charity. The folks who decide wheather or not to green light a project are gambling (with rather substantial amounts of money that isn't theirs) that the project is going to turn a substantial profit. If (for whatever reason) a gamble dosen't pay off as they would like, these folks aren't likely to take the same risk again.

None of this, however, effects how "good" a show is. In fact, there is no real objective guage for how "good" a show is, because the only person who can really decide if a show is good or bad is the person watching it at the time. All the other things that have been mentioned here (awards, revinues, critical acclaim, overall number and rabidity of fans) are really just other ways of measuring how profitable a show/movie is.

Just a couple last thoughts and I'll shut the hell up.

First, it is nearly impossible to change what another person thinks. If a person strongly holds a belief (and it dosen't matter what that belief is) then trying to force that person into believing something to the contrary is really an exercise in futility.

Second, (and possibly most important) all of the shows and movies that have been mentioned, compared, attacked, defended, advocated, or despised here have one very important thing in common.

They are light entertainment.
(relax folks, have some dip, in a thousand years nobody will have heard of any of it:D )

posted at August 3, 2006 02:28 PM

red_and_brown wrote:

Oh, and another thing - I was alive in 2002 and I was alive in 2005. I never heard of the movie or the show. Remind me again how that qualifies as good advertising?

posted at August 3, 2006 03:08 PM

Donna Jones wrote:

I am a 50 year old grandmother who has never posted anything anywhere in my life. I just had to respond to this site for some reason. I am not a Joss Whedon fan. I never watched Buffy or Angel or anything else with demonic themes. I like the original Star Trek and also Enterprise for the same reason, character developement! I am not a rabid fan of anything in particular but I love Firefly! I tried watching when it was aired originally and fell in love with the writing and characters even when I didn't understand what was going on. Now I know why! It was sheer bliss to see the episodes in order. I missed a few because of not being able to find it so I lost interest when it was on t.v. I love the interaction between the characters and that is what drew me to this show. I don't watch a lot of stuff on nowadays I don't get the sci-fi channel. I just know what I like. I don't care what genre a show is as long as I can care about the people. I do with Firefly. Thanks for listening.

posted at August 3, 2006 03:35 PM

Tink wrote:

I have watched every episode of this amazing series, as well as the movie and the only reason it failed is because FOX was not ready for it, that is all. I'm glad that BRAVO is takin up this great show, and it's a pity that the movie left no room for more.

posted at August 3, 2006 03:42 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

I admire pisher's persistence, the most valid point made being that there had better be room for Independent thought in our 'verse, or Browncoats and Brownshirts are pretty much the same folks.

posted at August 3, 2006 04:12 PM

pisher wrote:

I heartily agree with Chud's statements--although Firefly/Serenity weren't entertaining for me, I've frequently been entertained by films/shows of equivalent low quality. Hey, I'm an Ed Wood fan. Of course, he didn't need nearly as much money to make Plan 9 From Outer Space (still funnier than anything Whedon ever wrote, and who cares if it's supposed to be or not?)

A thousand years? Chud, nobody except a lingering handful of senile Browncoats trying to figure out how to play their outmoded DVDs will have heard of Firefly/Serenity in half a century. And no, nothing will change their minds, now or ever.

But see, here's the thing--I'M NOT TRYING TO CHANGE ANYONE'S MIND. And most Browncoats don't have a mind to change, anyway. Not when it comes to this subject, anyway.

But they sure do bristle nicely when they hear the truth. ;)

posted at August 4, 2006 03:59 AM

red_and_brown wrote:

"And most Browncoats don't have a mind to change, anyway."
I have one question for you, pisher: why do you feel the need to insult people? Granted, they have insulted you - but, if you don't want to be associated with us 'lowely, dumb Browncoats and our terrible show,' then why not take the high road?

posted at August 4, 2006 07:21 AM

Denise wrote:

I was just introduced to Firefly by DVD while recooping from surgery in January. My friend actually owned them and sent it to me. Not the Sci/Fi guru or geek as my "Con" attending hubby, whom thinks my opinion lacks a degree of knowledge. I thought it was a cute concept. The core actors worked OT to make it happen. I really enjoyed it! It was in the "same vein" as Zena or Hercules to me. The internal story was interesting but the character driven story was better. I enjoyed the actors, all of them seemed well suited for those roles. I did enjoy the romance and family realities of close quarters, those did add to the enjoyment for me~ "the girl". Over all it was a solid 7 out of 10 for me. That's better than half of the shows currently running on tv currently. The whimsical element kept me amused to watch the entire series over several times. That is a key for me. If I like it more than once and have a choice to choose something else.
A rebirth would be welcome. Yet I did like the main characters.

posted at August 4, 2006 07:50 AM

mrschip wrote:

I remember the promos. I remember watching the first episode and liking it very much. Then I remember not being able to find the damn show again.

As for the above pi$$ing match? School starts soon fellas. Hopefully you won't wind up in the same Algebra class.

posted at August 4, 2006 08:08 AM

Maori wrote:

Ah, Firefly wank, how I've missed thee. First, FOX has a history of canceling awesome shows.(Dark Angel anyone?) Second, what I find vastly amusing are people who "can't stand" Firefly and Serenity, yet they spend their time in a thread called "Brilliant but Canceled"....yah. What I also find absolutely hilarious are the non-fans trying to convice the fans they are sooo totally wrong and then proceed to list the reasons why. I've read this entire thread and I'm still looking for the point. Does anyone honestly thing that after reciting Box Office figures and Critic reviews we're all going to suddenly *gasp* Oh noes! You were right! This show is crap!...Oh, wait, that wasn't the point. Where is that damn thing, I just can't seem to find it...

Please. And the genre fans thing is so over used. I can't stand Westerns, but I will happily admit to being a Sci-Fi junky. Trek all the way! We are no small group of rabid fans. Firefly and Serenity have a huge following that happens to be growing.

Mac pointed out something very interesting very early in the thread. Some people don't like Shakespeare either. But these are usually the one who cannot understand nor comprehend the levels in which Shakespeare wrote. Whedon is a genius, as obviously evidenced by BtVS and not so obviously with AtS. Firefly is/was very different from his other work. A lot of my friends who aren't all that fond of Firefly usually say it has to do with the huge difference in not only the genre's but the work itself.

Watching C grade entertainment for fun. Sweet, cause I missed SpongeBob yesterday and I'd love to know what happened.

It's interesting to think though: Who decides what is truth? And What truth would that be, exactly?

posted at August 4, 2006 01:51 PM

TerryAlieo wrote:

Hey guys, if Sci-fi thought it would make them money, and had immense fan support, they could prolly get with Joss and resurrect the show. Sci-fi has been know to bring back old concepts with their new shows, so why not bring back a great show like Firefly.

posted at August 4, 2006 08:23 PM

rupertisareaver wrote:

I never saw the show when it had it's run, such as it was, on FOX, simply because it was on FOX and therefore not part of my tv rotation...but when it was cancelled, that was a sign to me that it had potential - I caught the movie the other day and afterwards got a hold of the tv shows on dvd and am even more pissed that it's not on the air, as it would be the third show I'd make it a point to watch when it's on instead of DVR'ing and deleting later. Excellent stuff, and I hope someone, somewhere finds a way to bring it back - it's TOO brilliant to be cancelled.

posted at August 4, 2006 09:19 PM

Pidge wrote:

Firefly is the only show I've ever watched where I love all the characters. As an avid Trekkie, I've had my fair share of loving a certain character, and only that one person. I can't pin down who's the best in Firefly, though, and I think that's why it captured me.
It's different than anything I've ever watched, which is another part of it's appeal for me. I've introduced it to just about all of my friends, and they all really liked it. My aunt and uncle, who usually aren't big sci-fi or western fans, even liked it, enough where they bought the series after only seeing 2 episodes.

There's something in Firefly that a lot of people were hoping to have more of on T.V. That's why there's such a fanbase. We realized it was something different and special.

And Pisher...Just deal with the fact that lots of people like the show. We know you don't like it, and that all you've been doing is flaming it. We all know it was cancelled, and that there probably won't be anything else other than the movie. We can all dream,though, and it's not your place to come in here and tell us that we're stupid for wanting to hope. It's like telling a kid he can't be an astronaught because 2 of our shuttles blew up. So just simmer down and let us remember how much we loved our little cult show.

posted at August 5, 2006 09:29 AM

fuzeitin wrote:

VERY LONG FIREFLY STORY

I have never heard of Firefly or Serenity at all. I am on the other end of the globe. I have never seen the show on TV. I don't have sci-fi channel and fox news is the only FOX on TV here. I am so detached from sci-fi since season 1 of Farscape that I only get to watch on AXN here. Most shows here are local TV and are fantasy soaps!! ^^
The only thing I know about Joss Whedon was that he created Buffy and Angel and was to direct the new Wonder Woman movie. I did like Buffy, and Angel. But Firefly? I never heard of it. I just stumbled into it while on the net looking up Wonder Woman movie updates.
I guess you know what I am talking about! (Inara!) I find Morena really beautiful and she was rumored to play WW. I was intrigued. I searched her info and found out very little credits on her belt. Firefly was one of them. I thought that was the end of it.
One day, I was in the mall looking up DVDs, Firefly jumped in front of me. TA MA DE! There it was! And there was also THE FLASH – DVD set. Well, I only have enough money for THE FLASH. So I bought that one. Leaving behind Firefly.
It was only a few days before my birthday. I went back there on my bday and bought it.
There was one problem though… Why it that the complete season of Firefly TV series has only 14 episodes?! I just presumed it was just that. So I watched it in order and fell in love with Kaylee all shiny!
I spent the most of the evenings up until dawn and finished 10 episodes. And then checked the net why there as only 14. That is when I learned that it got cancelled, and there was a movie called Serenity. (I came back to the shop the next and bought that too. River rocks on that one). Personally, I don’t know why I like it very much (all of it). Space ship and there were horses?!! Weird. But the more I watch it, the more I get into it. As the story unfolds, the more I loved the characters - and yet dreaded that it was about to come to an end. I just did not want to watch it anymore. ‘Objects in Space’ was getting closer. But I have to finish it.
And then… there was none.
I watched the movie and loved it. I just wished there were more of Inara in it. And Book and Wash survived. WISH… there was more.
Hmmmm… Nonetheless, it was BRILLIANT BUT CANCELLED.

posted at August 5, 2006 01:26 PM

Faye wrote:

This is most certainly the best show ever. It's hard to pick a favorite character or favorite episode because they're all so brilliant! Joss seems to take a stereotypical character and put an brilliantly unexpected twist on it, which adds a whole lot of charm. A life is not complete without watching this series.

P.S. What is Book's story? How could Joss leave us hanging like that? Ugh!

posted at August 5, 2006 01:26 PM

Leah wrote:

I LOVE FIREFLY/SERENITY!! This show sucked me in. It sucks that there won't be anymore episodes, and I heard from critics and other movie people or networks that Serenity was #2 Worldwide. Don't bite my head off, but I'm hearing a lot of different things. But I don't care. I love them both and have them both. Everything about both is wonderful. Fox is all about action, sex, dumming things down and now they show crappy shows and reality tv. Firefly was a true gem that was smart and way over their heads. If they had been patient, or if it wen't to Sci-fi, then I believe that Firefly would still be on the air. Long Live the Browncoats!!!

posted at August 6, 2006 01:49 AM

Selene wrote:

I am actually quite surprised that people don't do enough research to know what happened to the show. It wasn't canned. Whedon just had no desire to continue the project. It was more or less a research project for him. He just wanted to see if he could do a series and have a movie based on it. There are people out there who would like to pick up where Whedon left off, but it wouldn't be the same now would it. It wasn't canned it was voluntary. Even after being given the choice of having another series, Whedon turned it down. His accomplishment already complete, he has other fish to fry.

posted at August 6, 2006 07:30 AM

Scott Ellington wrote:

mrschip,
School never ends. That may be the most fundamental Buffy metaphor.
Avoiding conflict makes getting a life impo$$ible.
Waltzing into an Alliance-friendly bar on U-Day may be ill-advised,
but the results can be hilarious.
I think pisher brought a lot of life to this thread. The dude abides.

posted at August 6, 2006 09:43 AM

Shawnda wrote:

I had never even herd of Firefly until my boyfriend borrowed it from a friend for me to see . Let me tell ya I am not a si-fi fan at all BUT I loved this series !! The movie is just as great.So good that I am going to buy a copy for my self, also I want my dad to watch it. This show should still be playing today !! It's always the good ones they drop , they are there one week and gone the next.

posted at August 6, 2006 04:24 PM

Dale Schaaf wrote:

The only reason the show failed is because FOX aired the episodes out of sequence causing people to feel they missed something from Day ONE. The reason the movie failed is because the marketing campaign for the movie was extremely weak compared to other movies. If they would have advertised the action as opposed to the comedy it would have been a bigger hit. As well as advertisements at the right times on the right channels. People didn't even know this movie existed.

posted at August 6, 2006 04:41 PM

Eureka usa wrote:

It makes very little sense that shows as good as firefly are canceled all the time. I managed to get my parents and at least three cousins hooked on firefly after I lent them my tape of an episode (thus proving it's not just a isolated one or two people that like it but a wide array enjoyed this show), so why does it seem like no one cares? People are very much in favor of smart (some times out there) Tv. For goodness sakes, Stargate is on season 10. So why did firefly die so quietly?

Also how odd is it that the Nelson rating boxes are not A: on college campuses
B:In any house i know of (do you know anyone who actually has one?)
C: More accurate...why isn't there more advanced ways of seeing who's watching what...without being all "1984"

cheers fellow browncoats

posted at August 6, 2006 04:48 PM

Bryce wrote:

@Pisher.

Why devote so much time talking about something you hate? It seems like you could be doing more productive things, like taking a nice walk through the park,petting puppies, or even dare I say, talk about something you enjoy. But just bashing people with a holier-than-thou attitude is worthless. Why put all this effort into something so vain? Let the fanboys and girls discuss what they like, don't spoil their party.

posted at August 6, 2006 08:28 PM

Lizzie wrote:

When Firefly was finally aired in Australia in late 2004, the devastatingly late time slot and the premise (space western?) put me off, so much so that I never watched an episode until this year when, on a whim, I bought the box set for a discounted price.

It was one the best things I have ever done. I'm a huge Buffy fan and have been since I was ten years old (way back in 1998), but I distrusted the strange idea of the show. Joss Whedon was my idol, and I couldn't bare to dislike something he had created.

Firefly is a gift, and Serenity even more so. When people complain that they want another season, I think that's pretty selfish. The show is beautiful, and if it comes back I will be probably cry of happiness, but now we must respect what the show was. We were lucky to have it while it lasted.

posted at August 6, 2006 11:31 PM

pisher wrote:

Well, glad you think I 'brought life to this thread', Scott. I guess it is slightly appropriate that on a thread devoted to a show that supposedly celebrated nonconformity and rugged individuality, there should be at least one or two people willing to stand against the majority. Even if it's only the majority in a few frantic dwindling online hangouts.

I have this theory that the hardcore diehard fanbase of a given genre show will tend to embody the exact OPPOSITE traits in their personal behavior of their fictional heroes. Therefore, Star Trek fans tend to be people who could never possibly thrive in a military environment. X-Files fans tend to be people who don't want to hear the real truth, and believe whatever somebody in authority (over the show) tells them. And Browncoats tend to be rank conformists, marching in lockstep, all of them saying the exact same thing, desperately wanting to belong to something, even at the price of their individuality.

Also, judging by the ones I saw the movie with, they tend to giggle helplessly in anticipation of every line, and in some cases, they smell REALLY bad. I mean, I felt like I was watching the movie with the cast of an old Wes Craven movie.

It makes sense, in a way--we choose our heroes, all too often, because they embody the qualities we wish we had, but don't.

Now why don't you all contradict this point I just made about Browncoats being conformists by posting a few more dozen variations on "I think Firefly is just the greatest show ever, and why do you keep talking about something you hate?" posts?

:D

posted at August 7, 2006 06:15 AM

Adnerb wrote:

This was probably one of my favorite shows of all time. And to prove it I bought the DVD collection and I don't have a DVD player yet.

It was an incredible show. The writing was superb, the acting amazing. It was a show for people whose sophistication level was beyond "American Idol" and "The Simple Life". My feeling has always been that if Whedon and Co. could have sold it to one of the three major networks, it may have had a better chance.

I have to echo Lizzy's comment, we were very lucky to have it. It's a reminder of what really good television can be.

posted at August 7, 2006 10:43 AM

Rachael wrote:

Firefly is hands down one of my favorite shows. Every person that I have talked to has raved about this show. Why was it canceled? Maybe its because the brilliant guys from FOX didn't play the episodes in order. For example, the pilot wasn't shown first even after the heavy amount of advertising for the series. Isn't that the whole point of having a pilot, to grab the watcher's attention? They didn't even show the pilot they advertised for it was a totally different episode. Usually people don't air the pilot as the last episode but FOX is special. I am bitter, and I hope that they will make a second season that takes place before the movie. I would even be willing to donate money for it.

posted at August 7, 2006 03:12 PM

Sarah wrote:

I freaking love this show! I will admit, I'm not a Whedon fan (My mom is addicted to Buffy and Angel but I have refused to watch them with her). I bought her Serenity, not knowing about the series, and didn't care for the movie either way.

Fast forward half a year, I got so sick I couldn't move off the couch. Sci Fi happened to be on and I lost the remote so I ended up watching four episodes of Firefly and loving it. Finally, I bought the series and got my entire family addicted. We spent two weeks watching the series which culiminated in watching Serenity again, in tears.

This show was amazing and I secretly hope the new fan base being founded by word of mouth (I've already gotten my roommate, two friends, and my cousins addicted) will ressurect this series in one way or another.

posted at August 7, 2006 08:25 PM

Madi wrote:

firefly is one of my FAVORITE tv shows ever! my dad got on dvd and i got hooked in the first episode... the way its described above ("cowboys in space") is simply demeaning... the story lines are way more than that... the "hooker with a heart of gold" and the "sexpot mechanic" is almost irrelavent to the show.. yes, those are the backgrounds.. but thats not the center of the show... it makes the show sound like its all sex... and if you have seen the show you MUST watch the movie... it is probably my favorite movie ever made... quite breath taking

posted at August 8, 2006 11:51 AM

Kellen wrote:

I saw the movie Serenity and was surprised to hear there was a TV series. I quickly went out to rent the TV series and I wasn't disappointed! I love the show! I’m so upset that Fox canceled the show! Is there truly no hope to resurrect the show?

posted at August 8, 2006 02:40 PM

Reese wrote:

I'm so sad I only discovered this show after it had been cancelled. Luckily we trusted viewers opinions and bought the DVD set. I was hooked from the beginning. We then watched "Serenity" and was just amazed with how good the story was. I wish I was a fan while the show was on the air and when the cast showed up at Comicon some years ago. Firefly + Serenity = Brilliant!

posted at August 8, 2006 03:58 PM

reese wrote:

I think pisher and scott are stupid. They have so much damn time to go on forums like these and piss on everyone's good time just so they can feel better than everyone else. You guys are jerks.

posted at August 8, 2006 04:20 PM

Mark wrote:

As a fan of both the series and the movie - both within the past three months, as I haven't watched television since 2000 so I never saw the show broadcast - I thoroughly enjoy the characters and visual style of both. I find the dialog to be truly witty, and I think that each character had an individual voice.

And I think that half the episodes had weak stories, a few had terrible ones, and many had so many continuity and content errors that one of the strongest impressions the show gave was of sloppiness. All of the brilliant back-and-side story tended to get lost in the fragmented start-and-stop of individual episode arcs.

I think the premise is brilliant. I think that
Whedon created one of the best science fiction universes and some of the best characters I've ever seen. I'd want to spend time with them there.

But I think he needed to get someone with a little more maturity and alot higher standards to take charge of the series. If that had happened, then maybe there would not have been only one season.

posted at August 8, 2006 04:49 PM

emdepe wrote:

When I had surgery in December a friend brought over several DVDs for me to watch in my home-bound recovery. The Firefly set was one that my husband and I fell in love with. We never knew that this series existed. And if we had, we would have become devotees actually watching TV in the evening. We only wish there were more episodes to enjoy.

posted at August 8, 2006 08:53 PM

ann-thannath wrote:

So I was at my friend's house this year in May, we were taking a bit of a break....(we were studying for our college finals) and she suggested we watch an episode of Firefly (she has the DVD set). I told her I had never heard of it and she proceeded to look at me with a "How can you have never heard of Firefly, it is the most amazing show?" expression. Anyway, we finished watching the first episode, (and I'm going to go on a mini tangent here....I watch a lot of TV, I admit to being an anti-social hermit that hates the outdoors, hence the reason for all the TV, and I have watched a lot of TV shows of all genres, most I don't like)....anyway we finished the episode, I LOVED IT!!! So what did I do, the night before my BioChem final? (All fans of the show will understand....) Yes, I proceeded to watch the next 5 episodes....4 primo hours of studying lost to the brilliance of Firefly. Needless to say the next day, I didn't do so well on the final. =D. I should also point out I did not know who Joss Whedon was so I wasn't a previous fan and I am not a big fan now, don't get me wrong I love Firefly, but Buffy and Angel and many of his other projects have done nothing for me. I have never been, nor am I now, a sci-fi fan. But something about Firefly got to me, I love the simplistic wit and well-developed unique characters. Just shiny.
Firefly gets a solid 4.999999999/5 from me....hey...no show is 100% perfect. =D

I also saw Serenity, and loved it, I have watched it many, many, many times. And still love it. I might also say that I saw the excuse of a preview for the movie a grand totla of how many times you might ask...I'll tell... a mind-blowing 3 times. Sad...that is the only word to describe that, pathetic even. Another Brilliant show bites the dusk to make way for mediocre...**NEW AND BETTER** shows. (*cough* YEAH RIGHT *cough*) A tragic loss indeed.

posted at August 9, 2006 03:42 AM

Rachael wrote:

I work at a independant video store and the Firefly series and Serenity are among the most consistently popular rentals we have.

posted at August 9, 2006 11:27 AM

Scott Ellington wrote:

reese,
You're right, and I apologize.
I meant to say there's more firefly than the series and the film, and never even mentioned the comic, the novelization and the book of essays.
I can't get enough of this stuff. Pissing on other people's fun is absolutely NOT what I aimed to do. (Not even pisher's).

posted at August 9, 2006 12:43 PM

allyson wrote:

I totally agree this show and the movie that followed were both great...I own them both and watch them religiously! Joss Whedon is completely genious.

posted at August 9, 2006 01:02 PM

Taylor wrote:

Where to begin. Well, Fox really... how to put it? Dug a grave for this show? I remember seeing commercials for it and thinking, "Good Lord! That looks like an extremely weird/stupid show." But then... I'd say a little more than a year ago, my dad picked up the DVD series... He does this every once in a while. Needless to say, he got the entire family hooked on it at once. Including my mom, which relly says something.

The show itself... goodness, where to start? It has so much character. The characters are all so unique. You just can't help but fall in love with them. Each one of them is so endearing (even Jayne). The show has just the perfect mixture of pretty much every genre. The concept is amazing, as well. Who doesn't love rebels? I love Joss Whedon's idea for the show, and they way that he portrays it.

Even just watching little portions of the show makes you realize that either the cast really loves each other or they are EXTREMELY talented actors and actresses. Or it could be both.

No matter what, just thinking about Firefly makes me get all shivery inside. And let me tell you, I feel so attached to the characters that I actually (Serenity spoiler) cried when Wash died in the movie. No. Not cried. I bawled for like half an hour after the movie was over.

Ever single person that I have ever showed episodes to has fallen head over heels for it. If you haven't watched an episode or the movie, so help me God you need to.

posted at August 9, 2006 01:22 PM

Todd wrote:

I was impressed to see all of the responses regarding Firefly. I too was one of the ones that never knew anything about this show until the movie Serenity.
Network executives continue to demand an immediate top 10 show with huge ratings. They never give a show time to develop a following.
They move the show, pull it for several weeks, try a replacement show for a few weeks, then cancel that one too.
How do we as viewers ever get to voice our complaints to network execs? We dont.

Look at what ABC is doing to Lost next season. Fans complained about the re-run episodes. So, this season, it wont begin until October, run for 6 or 8 weeks then be off until February "due to production demands." By the time February gets here, who will still care about Lost???

I wish that Firefly could have been saved.

posted at August 9, 2006 02:00 PM

Doug Crowell wrote:

Pisher. You strike me as an avid debater. I am not even sure that you really dislike Firefly or its big screen finale. I get the feeling that you relish the point and counterpoint process of debating more than you believe in the convictions of your arguments. I am not a browncoat, nor a Josh Wheadon fanboy. My first exposure to the Verse was at the opening of Serenity. I was not exposed to any advertising prior to seeing the movie. I just happened to go with a friend. I found the movie enjoyable, slightly humorous, and I left feeling that I had not wasted my hard earned dollars (unlike alot of movies these days).

Did the movie blow my socks off? No. Did it leave me feeling that I was missing the backstory? Yes. Did it make me curious to learn more? Yes. I quickly found that the movie was based on a cancelled TV series. Upon reflection of my movie exprience I came to the conclusion that I liked the characters, premise and dialogue enough to shell out $49.00 for the DVD set of the cancelled TV show. My exprience seems to echo so many other fans of the show. After watching all the episodes in order and learning the backstory, I bought and rewatched Serenity on DVD. The movie was much more rewarding after knowing the backstory of the characters.

So Pisher, here are my points in support of the show:

Art is in the eye of the beholder. One man's art is another man's trash. So to debate the show based on artistic merit is pointless.

The movie was indeed a box office failure financially, and likely will never see the big screen again. Loving the show and the movie like I do, I can still recognize that the movie was more of a tying up of loose ends than a formula blockbuster. However, not turning a profit does not translate into a movie being bad. Serenity was a better SciFi offering than Star Wars (of which I am a big fan), Aeon Flux or other such fare. It was said earlier in this thread that timing was a big factor in box office take, and that was a valid point. Other than a few well established frachises like Batman and Spiderman, most movies have been disappointing at the box office.

To cut this post off, I would ask Pisher to clarify whether or not he has watched the TV Series (in order) and then watched the Serenity movie. If not, please do so. Then I would be glad to debate the merits/shortcomings of the Firefly/Serenity productions with you.

Sincerely,

Doug Crowell,
a fan of movies in general

posted at August 9, 2006 04:50 PM

Anthony wrote:

I was first told of FireFly by a buddy of mine. Somehow or another I missed this jewel of a SciFi series. I remember seeing the previews for Serenity, but never actually got around to seeing it. Well when the SciFi Channel aired FireFly I caught the last aired episode. Boy was I instantly hooked. When the DVD set was available I procrastinated a bit, but eventually purchased it. I was really excited to see that the DVD put the episodes in their actual order instead of their aired order. Well here is the true testament to how good a series is. I decided to geek-out one weekend and watch the whole series plus Serenity, I was about half way thru an episode and just about to go to bed for the night to pick it up in the morning. Well my wife, who doesn't like SciFi all that much, set down next to me to finish watching the episode. By the end of the episode she was hooked. She stayed up the rest of the night and into the morning to watch the previous episodes. Once she was all caught up she woke me up. We made lunch. Popped in a Disney movie for the kids and started watching the rest of FireFly. Yes my wife was an instant addict. She was extremely upset when I told her that the series was cancelled and that the movie was the end. Since then well periodically watch an episode kinda working our way back through the series. It's amazing how much "new" information that you discover each time you watch an episode. Nothing big, just fine details. I too wish that there could have been new life for FireFly. Don't get me started on Enterprise being cancelled just to be replaced with Britney Spears.

posted at August 9, 2006 06:44 PM

Sarah wrote:

I remember seeing the show when it was first on Fox and was so upset when it was canceled but overjoyed when it came out on DVD(and I snap it up right away, and watched the whole thing in one sitting). When Serenity came out of course I watched it right away. I was so happy to have a bit of conclusion on some questions I had from Firefly. I would love love love to see these characters again, any chance another movie or show?

posted at August 9, 2006 09:43 PM

red_and_brown wrote:

Browncoats? Rank comformists? Hell, the only thing most of us can agree on is Firefly/Serenity - especially on fff.net.
::laughs at the sillyness of pisher::

posted at August 9, 2006 10:13 PM

becker wrote:

I remember ads for Firefly and being mildly interested. I never watched the show. I forgot, didn't find it, whatever. I recently saw the DVD's. I enjoyed them. I wish there were more episodes. I wanted to know more. I wanted to find out more. I wanted to see "these people" again. I am glad the movie was made. It provided no closure and I honestly did not care particularly for it, but I was glad it was made all the same. (Did "Wash" in typical Wheedon fashion have to die like that?)

I think that all the fans wanted more. They still do. Forums like this one offer the chance to get a little more. Fans don't care about box office numbers. The series was cancelled, that is that. The movie was made, that is that. Browncoats will never stop wanting more. Those who don't care for the Firefly/Serenity world are entitled to their opinion. Their choice to post their negative comments in a site that is dedicated to the desire for more and "mourning" for the show's cancellation is merely a reflection of the desire to be antagonistic. Let browncoats commiserate!

It might be fun for the series to experience a rebirth. Unlikely.If you really miss Firelfly ,I believe Joss Wheedon writes a comic book serial based on it. Look it up. If you want more, it may be the only way.

The point? Many loved or at least appreciated Firefly. I would have been nice to have a lot more of it. Browncoats, commiserate away, and if you are one of the ones who did not like the show, leave fans to mourn in peace. Your logic makes little difference.

posted at August 9, 2006 10:24 PM

AliBaba wrote:

Another fan here who never even heard of the show until after the movie came out. (So those people who say Firefly was heavily promoted couldn't prove it by me.) Rented the movie and just loved it. After that, bought the series-DVD, sight unseen, and have watched every episode repeatedly. I don't think I've ever owned another movie that I've watched as often as this - and it never gets old for me.

Like others here, I've converted (brown-coated?) friends and family. The fact of the matter is, it was a fine, intelligently written show. The poster who claimed there was no character development either never actually watched the show, or is possibly a Fox executive.

It was probably too smart for TV. The success of such sludge as American Idol and Survivor are proof enough to me that the average viewer wants only to sit in front of the television until their brains are utterly empty - not be stimulated, moved, or treated as if they were an intelligent human being capable of appreciating a show that actually respects the laws of physics.

And the death of Firefly is further proof that the average IQ is average...

posted at August 10, 2006 06:13 AM

Stace wrote:

I have to admit that I was skeptical about the premise of Firefly (I am NOT a Buffy or Angel fan), but an old ex-boyfriend told me: Watch this. You'll love it. And love it I do...I was shocked at how clever the series was. It is like watching a western (which I also hate) with sci-fi (which I can take or leave), but moreover, it's a fun show to watch, with lots of conflicts, not only between people but also within themselves...Wow. It's a shame that the show was ruined by playing everything out of order--I am sad that this show did not have a successful take-off due to poor decision-making on FOX's part--playing everything out of order! pre-empting episodes! I suppose watching Firefly, as FOX played them--is like watching LOST or some other serial TV show completely out of order--so you lose track of the mystery!
What makes me glad is that I know Firefly/Serenity will eventually be like the Rocky Horror Picture show--with a growing cult following. Too bad the show didn't go on further...and most people I know have liked the TV show (but have different opinions on the movie).

posted at August 10, 2006 04:37 PM

s wrote:

Okay, now I'm starting to take umbridge. pisher, when you feel like you have to insult people's personal hygiene in order to put across your point about why something they like sucks, you're scraping the bottom of the barrel, argument-wise. What does the alledgedly questionable grooming habits of Firefly fans have to do with the artisitic merit of the movie and the show?
And as for calling us all "rank conformists"- if the movie and show were as horrible as you say, what are we conforming to? You've said repeatedly that there is only a small number of us, as the rest of the world is far too sophisticated and intellegent to appreciate such drivel. So, how is it conforming when we are so few in numbers?
But enough of that. The point I take issue with is that you have somehow concluded that your opinion is more valid than anyone else's. I don't know if I speak for everyone when I say this, but here's what I think: I don't care what you think of Firefly and Serenity. I appreciate that you don't like it. I'm a Stargate fan, and one of my best friends says the show is stupid. I disagree, but I don't tell her she smells bad because of that. ^.~ No one requires you start liking Serenity, pisher. What we do require is that you treat us with respect, and extend the same courtesy you wish us to extend to you: the right to have an opinion that differs from another person's.

posted at August 13, 2006 02:36 AM

Faerla wrote:

Quote: "I am actually quite surprised that people don't do enough research to know what happened to the show. It wasn't canned. Whedon just had no desire to continue the project. It was more or less a research project for him. He just wanted to see if he could do a series and have a movie based on it. There are people out there who would like to pick up where Whedon left off, but it wouldn't be the same now would it. It wasn't canned it was voluntary. Even after being given the choice of having another series, Whedon turned it down. His accomplishment already complete, he has other fish to fry."

This...This is supposed to be a joke, right? This is one of those 'sarcasm doesn't read in print'lines, isn't it? Or are you suggesting Selene, that Joss spent a couple years lying to his fairly rabid fans (well, we are) about not resting til he found his show a home? And lied throughout the commentaries? And on the Serenity intro? Man, if he was lying, he oughta drop writing and go into acting full time!

posted at August 13, 2006 08:53 PM

Deedra wrote:

I was so sad when they pulled it...I wanted so much more. Not just a movie but seasons of shows. I feel somewhat cheated by FOX and its executives...

posted at August 14, 2006 08:25 PM

Kit wrote:

I loved the movie, it really was fresh and enjoyable. I didn't know there was a tv show. I think its time to borrow it from a friend.

posted at August 15, 2006 01:07 PM

Buzzramjet wrote:

As for Firefly, it's true that Fox had poorly promoted the show. I watch Fox all the time especially because of Simpsons, Family Guy etc. AND can't even remember ever seeing a promotion for it.

My niece who has a husband who is part of the 501st Legion of Stormtroopes, in fact one of the founding members and who is a huge sci fi fan NEVER heard of the show until I sent her as a present, the FIREFLY DVD set. She is now a serious fan and can't understand how they missed the show. So please spare anyone the nonsense that it was well promoted. IT WASN'T.

And, as time has gone on it's showing that a proper schedule, full season and some time, the show would have become a huge hit. Just look at the legions of fans now. It just keeps growing and growing. That is the bottom line. The studios in their insane rush to have A HIT NOW! as someone else said, will simply go somewhere else. They will waste tens of millions of dollars trying for a hit and in the meantime lose sight of those shows that are really good and just need time to have a STEADY schedule and develope the fan base needed.

One of the most famous ALMOST cancelled shows was CHEERS. It did terribly and only the faith of the network CEO kept it going and it became a huge money maker.

So yes it is indeed ALL Fox's fault. they simply had no idea of what it was they had allowed to be cancelled and I am sure they are still blathering about whether to bring it back or not.

OR whether they could do it without Joss. This isn't a show that is simply going to go away.

Next I did work in the industry both as a set/FX worker and as an assistant to an entertainment attorney.

The Slate article is complete hogwash. Let's get that straight. Theatre owners haven't taken a fifty percent cut in so many decades as to be ancient history. Perhaps in the B side of releases they might get 15/20 percent, but that's about it. Never in A-List releases.

So let's take a better look at how all of this is done.

In the theatres, theatres rarely get even the cost of a ticket or else a small percentage therein. This is why you pay 5 bucks for 5 cents worth of popcorn and 3 bucks for 6 cents worth of syrup.

The candy/drink counter is how almost all theatres survive now. Think about how much you spend to take you and your date/family in counter products. Easily 25 bucks or more and their cost is all of about 2 bucks of the 25. Multiply by thousands and thousands.

In A-List movies, they won't see a single dime of the ticket cost. BUT for the theatre owners, it's worth the risk because when you get a movie like Star Wars 1, 2, 3 you know your theatre is going to be packed for weeks alone and with that comes the sales of more popcorn, candy, drinks and hot dogs than you can shake a stick at. The theatre owner cleans up on those items.

As well why do you think there is so much advertising in theatres today. I saw Pirates II the other day and it was TWENTY TWO minutes of ads and previews. FAR too much but theatre owners need the money. It's not just greed, but survival.

BUT as well they sometimes get lucky in ticket sales. Some movies are foisted off on theatres in return for a small percentage of the A-List ticket. Small being the primary word here. Say as little as fifty cents per ticket. BUT they get lucky sometimes. A prime example is MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING. Theatres had to take that piggybacked onto an A-list movie, and were allowed to keep a very large percentage of the ticket. It turned into a hit. This doesn't happen often but it does happen.

With the example of GONE IN SIXTY SECONDS, Slate had their heads up their rearends and if I was a betting man I would say that story was planted.

The theatre owners did NOT get 50 percent of the tickets sales. They would be ecstatic to get that kind of return. BUT they don't. They were probably lucky to get 75 cents a ticket. Although it had an A-list cast and cost, it was not considered an A-List movie.

BUT we are just getting started here. Movie studios have publicly stated the DVD sales are their bread and butter, BUT they are lying. It is definitely the bread, but the REAL SALES/BUTTER are in TV rentals.

NOW first remember we are not talking about your local KZZX small town. We are talking WORLD WIDE rentals. Both in Network, Cable and PPV as well as paid cable like Cinemax (now showing Serenity)Most movies can bring in, in excess of three times their cost without breaking a sweat in TV sales/rentals alone over the next few years.

These movies are rented all over the world to an audience in the BILLIONS. The advertising dollars alone are mindboggling.

This is one of those little bits they don't like to mention, as though TV is the red headed stepchild no one likes to talk about. BUT movie studios LOVE TV rentals.

Serenity is already well into the black. Making a sequel is a no brainer. Time for it is the problem.

YES it was horribly promoted. Look at the promotions for some movies, you can't turn the channel without seeing the same movie promoted NONSTOP! Flight Plan, Which I thought was lame and predictable (a lousy robbery for cripes sake), was promoted beyond belief. You had to search for Serenity ads.

Let's get one more thing straight. Pissher is a troll. We need to understand that first and foremost. He has no life and lives to aggravate people. It gives his sorry worthless life meaning. Which is too bad, cuz he does know how to type and one would think he would use that ability to go to sites where his typing would be put towards POSITIVE thinking and writing.

But that wouldn't get him off.

Would it.

posted at August 16, 2006 02:17 PM

Justin wrote:

Ha!
Pisher's a funny dude. I've emjoyed his comments most of all. Good job, dude. Its funny how much time and energy this guyhas given to this talkback about a movie he doesn't like. That's some deep seated hate there, man. I feel bad for you, but dude.. you are funny.

I do want to point out that the DVD sales of Firefly have been enormously successful. This fact cannot be disputed. Other shows have come and gone, but this one just continues to sell.

The movie money.. not so much.. but the trailer didn't do much for me. Sci fi fans had to be convinced because they didn't care for Buffy, but I haven't met many who didnt like the flick. It had had a good DVD life, and will likely continue to do so. It will likely be the next ARMY OF DARKNESS, discovered for years by fans on DVD. I tend to show the movie first.. its an easier sell, it does spoil some stuff, but it has convinced at least 3 box-set purchases for my circle.

Anyway.. yeah, pisher.. you're a riot. Good job again.

posted at August 16, 2006 06:35 PM

Tommy wrote:

Firefly/Serenity rules!

posted at August 16, 2006 07:36 PM

Comatose wrote:

YOU PEOPLE ARE NUTS!!!FIREFLY IS THE BEST THING EVER TO EVER BE CREATED!!! And whoever dont like Firefly or Serenity simply hasn't seen it and paid any attention. I hate sci fi. I hate westerns. Love this though. Not something that can be logically explained, but this is flawless art and deserves high regaurd and recognition.

posted at August 17, 2006 04:42 AM

red_and_brown wrote:

"Kit wrote:

I loved the movie, it really was fresh and enjoyable. I didn't know there was a tv show. I think its time to borrow it from a friend. "

Yes! Another convert! Whoo!

We are the Legion of Browncoats; and, this time, the Alliance will lose!

posted at August 18, 2006 08:26 PM

Tristan wrote:

I'm a huge sci-fi nut, although I typically despise westerns, I actually liked this series when a friend loaned it to me... I would say its the be-all, end-all show, but its a lot better than a lot of the reality junk on and insipid night type soap shows... I felt some actors were more keyed in than the others, or believable, but on the whole well acted and the plots were different from everything else on TV... Interesting and fun, and the movie was pretty good too... Cheers!

posted at August 19, 2006 08:49 AM

FFLink13 wrote:

I was so upset when i heard Firfly was not to be shown anymore... i have been reding through the net though, and i am hopefull that they will make more :D

Anyway, Firfely simply is the best (put in short) and should never stop. ever.

posted at August 19, 2006 04:31 PM

Pete wrote:

I know one thing about Hollywood, they are idiots. Why would they cancel something this good?

posted at August 20, 2006 01:39 PM

Neill Edwards wrote:

I had never heard of Firefly or Serenity until my son waltzed in the door, saying "You gotta see this!" and my wife and I were AMAZED. We have now seen every episode at least 5 times and Serenity about 4 times. All this hoo-ha about FOX and Universal is really irrelevant, since Whedon wrote the series more like a poem than prose. There are four or five levels in it and the audience is required to THINK about the mental states of each character and how those states of mind and awareness are modified by each scenario. And the unresolved characters such as the Preacher - not explaining himself and/or his reasons for joining Firefly - or, for that matter the enigmatic government operative, who never is angry, but kills without compunction and who devotes thought to River - now THERE is a character worth following up on. And River herself, who has unknown and possibly undreamt-of abilities - (particularly against the Reavers in Serenity - as well as against Jayne....) In short, this is first semi sci-fi story that really grips you (unlike something like Stargate SG1, which has now gone through some 200 performances, almost all of which were deadly slow, and come to think of it even the original film was quite slow in parts) (back to Firefly.....) ... that really grips you and makes you think and then think again. Possibly the best series I have ever seen.

So maybe the series flopped not only due to mismanagement on the part of the companies, but also because audiences in the USA do not like to have to think at all? The rest of the western industrialized world will love the series. There really could and ought to be a follow-up to Serenity.

posted at August 21, 2006 05:28 AM

Paula Roberts wrote:

Everybody has said it better than me but I will add I miss "Firefly" so much!

posted at August 22, 2006 05:33 AM

Linda Sharp wrote:

I miss Firefly. Thank God they finished it up with Serenity. Thank you Joss.

posted at August 23, 2006 02:09 PM

Kat wrote:

This is the only TV show I have ever become addicted to so quickly. After the first episode, I had to have more. I watched the entire DVD set in 5 days (would have been faster if the video store had had them all in at the same time!), then immediately bought the series so I could watch it all over again. The movie was wonderful of course too. You can't beat the dialogue, characters, story line, music... i could go on and on. Completely unbelievable that Fox could be so stupid as to cancel it.

posted at August 23, 2006 06:03 PM

Chrissy:) wrote:

I had never heard of Firefly or Serenity until my friend brought over the box set and movie for my family to watch. We're all hooked- from my father-in-law on down to my kids who go around singing "Take my love, take my land, take me where I cannot stand..." lol
I really think this was the best television series I've ever seen. It makes me very sad to think that there will be no more...and very excited to think that maybe, just maybe there might be! We've bought our own boxset and movie copies, so count us in as a browncoats. I guess that makes my friend a sergeant or something, because she's recruited a platoon. lol

posted at August 25, 2006 12:32 PM

JKD wrote:

Firefly was some of the best television I've ever watched. I'm defnitely not a genre person; I have no preference for the setting of what I watch or read. What I look for is quality, and Firefly had quality in spades. The dialogue was very well-written, the characterization was superb, and everything just clicked.

I did have a problem with the rather weak science (all those planets in only one system?) in some regards, but adored it in others (no sound in space. Brilliant).

I did see some of the promos for the show leading up to the (then) new season and thought it might be interesting; here was sci-fi on network TV that wasn't Star Trek :) Ironically, I hadn't known Joss was behind the show, else I never would have watched it; can't stand either Buffy or Angel ;)

Serenity, though, was only okay. The main problem was that I think 1) Joss works in TV (just like James Cameron's attempt at small screen, Dark Angel, suffered from Cameron being used to wrapping everything up in 2 hrs), and, more importantly, 2) Serenity seemed like it was what would have been the end of the series 2-3 years down the road and left the impression of a lot that was missing. For me, the movie failed to connect with the show. Still, it was an ok work; far better than others I've seen.

The bottom line is some people will like (or love) Firefly, others won't, but as long as we don't hurl insults at each other, it's all shiny.

posted at August 25, 2006 12:58 PM

red_and_brown wrote:

"I did have a problem with the rather weak science (all those planets in only one system?)..."

Most of the 'planets' were actually moons that had been terraformed. I think... (I'm sort of a SereniFly nerd).

posted at August 26, 2006 07:43 PM

JKD wrote:

My point, red, was that a single system with dozens and dozens of terraformable bodies stretches believability somewhat; I was well aware many were moons. My comment is actually supported by Joss' own commentary where he admits that he didn't give the science that much attention (aside from not having sound in space, which, as I said, was way cool).

posted at August 28, 2006 10:56 AM

Dave wrote:

Anyone heard from Pisher the Troll lately?

I am happy to report that "Serenity" has just won the 2006 HUGO AWARD for best Sci-Fi film of the year!!

Pisher, in case you don't know, the Hugo Awards are the pre-eminent awards given for best science fiction in all media. They are the Oscars and Pulitzers of sci-fi, if you will. But, surely you've heard of the Hugo Awards...

Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form: Serenity Written & Directed, Joss Whedon. (Universal Pictures/Mutant Enemy, Inc.)

http://www.sfwa.org/news/2006/06hugowinners.htm

Pisher, you may otherwise remain content to be a member of the uninformed, unwashed "majority".

Hah. I love it.

posted at August 28, 2006 10:32 PM

Dave wrote:

The P-Dude's not really gone for good, is he? I am so looking forward to hearing him twist himself into a semantic pretzel, some wonderfully bombastic, pompous oratory about how the HUGO AWARDS ARE IRRELEVANT , or that they were somehow fixed because the entire Awards jury were JOSS WHEDON FANS and/or Browncoats! And Serenity is still a crap movie! So sez I!

Listen to the Hugo audience go absolutely nuts and watch as Morena Baccarin ("Inara") reads Joss's emailed acceptance speech to the crowd, as she accepts the award on his behalf:

Holy crow, it sounds like the entire audience has been infiltrated by Browncoats!

I dunno, Pisher, the Hugos are not fanboy awards. They've been around a very, very long time and some VERY big names have won Hugo Awards over the years. Still, as Spike Lee said in "She's Gotta Have It", "Please, baby, please, baby,please!!"... we are all dying to hear how you shoot this one down too.
Inquiring minds want to know.

posted at August 29, 2006 05:34 PM

Chris wrote:

it bothers me because fox is one of the biggest tv studios. Altho they could have gone elsewhere, saddens me that a show with such prosperity get's cancelled and replaced by quick million shows where they don't need to pay actors.

posted at August 29, 2006 08:26 PM

red_and_brown wrote:

"My point, red, was that a single system with dozens and dozens of terraformable bodies stretches believability somewhat; I was well aware many were moons. My comment is actually supported by Joss' own commentary where he admits that he didn't give the science that much attention (aside from not having sound in space, which, as I said, was way cool)."

That's fine - just making sure we're on the page, is all.

posted at August 30, 2006 07:46 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

If Sandy Grushow was the suit-in-charge of the desk where studio and network chose to terminate Firefly, I guess our frequent references to "Fox executives" really means HE didn't get it and HE killed the show.
Press releases, interviews and editorials tend to be a little vague on matters of responsibility for major blunders.
I wonder if anybody here actually knows how the thing came down. The person who tells that tale might work in the industry never again, but more stuff would make better sense to us outsiders.

posted at August 31, 2006 06:15 PM

Firefly Tivo Bug wrote:

My family enjoyed this show so much then stupid FRACKING FOX, canceled it of course, just like they cancled Keen Eddie. My father was so mad about it he kept the last show on tivo until I bought him the boxed set thank heavens for Joss and dvd turnouts. Now my brother who is the most pluged in person I know, lives breathes, and some days eats firefly. He could hardly contain himself when Serenity came out.

posted at August 31, 2006 09:17 PM

Fivemoon wrote:

There are solar systems out there with planets with up to 19 times the mass of Jupiter. I can barely wrap my head around that reality. The solar system in which Firefly takes place having many planets and moons makes more sense by comparison.

posted at September 1, 2006 04:12 AM

Ray wrote:

The name 'Sandy Grushow' certainly rings a bell with me. I partly remember reading that time line for when Firefly was originally aired, and from what I recall it 'was' pretty much all his decision to dump the show.
I've trawled the net for that document but for some reason it seems to have mysteriously disappeared. Wonder why that is?

posted at September 1, 2006 12:30 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

Ray,
I Googled his name and found a ton of references. Most are warm and fuzzy accolades to the Chairman of the Fox Television Entertainment Group since November 1999 who had oversight of both the entertainment and broadcast operations of the Fox Broadcasting Company and Twentieth Centry Fox Television.
There's a News Corporation press release dated 05, January 2004 that details his departure from his post as chairman (for complex personal reasons) to head a Fox-based production company called Phase Two. He surprised the industry by making this decision to leave his job (1983-2004) a few months before his contract was due to expire.
PressRelease is not my native tongue, but I tried to follow the money to the place where the buck stops. That place was voluntarily vacated by the guy who was in charge of studio and broadcast when Firefly was killed.
The papertrail leaves plenty of wiggle room for plausible deniability. I'm just sayin'....
Near as I can figure, Sandy Grushow was the perp, and Gail Berman held his coat.

posted at September 4, 2006 10:49 AM

jim wrote:

(Editors Note: For more info on all of these comments- check out Sean Maher's Interview in "Insider/Outsider")

There's a few fundamental reasons why the show (and I loved it, so I'm not attacking it.. I show it to heaps of people, and many of them go out and get their own set by the time they're done) failed.

#1: Advertising. The job of advertising is to sell the product. If the product didn't sell, the advertising isn't going to do any good.

#2: Fox. Note that I didn't say Fox/Universal. Fox has a repeat habit of cancelling series' within a few episodes right before they manage to get their bearings. Go watch the first episode of Family Guy's "new run" and Peter runs through a fairly long list - and a LOT of the ones on the list are GOOD shows. Some things, on Fox, that I'd like to point out:
1) Skin. One of my favorite shows (although I can see why other people didn't like it, and it was at best only a semi-new take on an oft repeated story)
2) The Simple Life. Dear god. Ran for two or three seasons, and NO ONE can tell you that it's well-written TV.
3) Jackass and it's clones (okay, so this one is really MTV, I just felt like I needed to point it out)

Fox has a tendency overall to keep the mindless dumb shows and not support the good ones well enough. There ARE a few exceptions. I'm frankly surprised that Bones and House are still around, and I don't think 24 is a testament to how great fox is but a testament to the fact that a great show CAN do well (maybe it was a fluke?) despite fox.

The previews for Firefly looked dumb. They really did. Firefly was often on my "if I don't have anything better to do Friday night (yeah, right) maybe I'll try to catch it".

I saw the entire series in order, so I can't truthfully say how well I'd have liked it out of order (we'll never know) but I'd imagine it wouldn't have impressed me much.

#3. (Sorry joss): The production style. If a show can't be "picked up" on a casual basis, it most likely won't survive. Shows you "can't miss" an episode of don't usually work (there are some exceptions, but it's IN GENERAL the rule).. because you lose viewers to "Well, I've missed so much I don't really know what's going on.. I'll rent it on netflix later"

Star Trek (all except DS9) did fairly well by most accounts (fairly well because at no time I can recall was it ever, in any of its incarnations on TV, a "blockbuster") - because it has a nice formula - bad things happen, the enterprise saves the day, show ends more or less where it started. House follows this pattern, as does bones, which is why it's still on the air. As far as "mainstream" tv is concerned, Prison Break, Lost, and 24 are the only shows I can think of where you HAVE to see them sequentially.

Simpsons has made a 10 year career on the fact the characters don't change over time. Hell, aren't bart and lisa STILL 4th graders? But while the writing is good, the glory of the simpsons is that anyone can catch an episode, even seasons after the previous one they saw, and jump right in.

DS9 was (second to enterprise maybe?) the major flop in the star trek universe. I truly feel that the writing, acting, plot and even effects were better than any other Trek series (although I really liked early voyager too, for different reasons). But it lost out completely because of it's format... if people missed episodes, they missed too much and it's frustrating to only get snippets of the greater picture.

#4: Okay, not a reason, just an explaination: Serenity is a sci-fi movie in a world where sci-fi is a niche market and doesn't typically do very well (unless part of a major franchise). Most of the Treks did okay (as far as I can tell, no real numbers to back it up) but all I can say is that serenity was packed for the first two weeks. I saw it a couple times in the theatres, and I had difficulty finding seats both times.

HOWEVER: After the initial hysteria, all the fans of the failed show have seen it. Game over. The advertising was *decent* on universal's part, but seemed to be largely geared towards existing fans rather than trying to gather new ones. In fact, some of the dialogue (Specifically, "If someone tries to kill you, you try to kill them right back") wasn't even IN the movie (Pretty sure that line was out of the "Mrs. Reynolds" episode.. don't remember the name but it was that con artist girl who married Mal that the line was to). This is NOT what I'd call "quality promotion". Furthermore, to think that a movie based on a series that tanked was a good idea is just a plain stupid concept. I'd be surprised if it breaks even.

What they SHOULD have done was try to get Sci-Fi or UPN to pick them up for another season or two, get some fanbase and THEN try for a movie.

Really though, Star Trek aside, when have movies based on TV shows EVER really worked? There've been a few OLD shows that have been made into movies that kinda did OK (charlie's angels apparently did well since they made a second one) but it's basically asking for a failure straight from the beginning.

I bet if you did a 24 movie (called '2'?) it'd probably tank as well. I don't think "Lost" would do much better.

posted at September 8, 2006 10:03 AM

Ray wrote:

RE Scott, thanks for the info. I've read that Gail Berman helped Whedon develop BTVS into a TV series for the WB network. Since the cancellation of Firefly though, I believe they have spoken not once.

posted at September 9, 2006 05:55 AM

Lenita wrote:

I agree with most folks in that Fox's handling (or non-handling) of Firefly's promotion really stank. When the series came out and I saw the commercials, I must say I really wasn't that impressed. And I've been a life-long sci-fi fan dating back to when the original Trek was pretty much the only sci-fi on the air.

Well one day I decided to give Firefly a chance, and I watched exactly one episode. I didn't know it at the time but it was "Our Mrs. Reynolds" and I remembered thinking that this was WAY better than anything else on tv! For reasons I still don't understand, I never really watched it again. Maybe it was because I came in at the middle of the series, maybe laziness, I dunno... Well I forgot about it till some friends of mine told me I MUST SEE SERENITY!! So fearing for my safety lest I drag hiney too long, I went to see Serenity and was blown away. I couldn't believe how good it was. It was quite possibly the best thing I could remember seeing in a very long time. I kicked myself all the way home wondering how I could be so stupid for not giving the series more attention. Well I went and got the series from the library and watched the whole thing over a couple of days. I am now officially hooked, addicted, and psychologically dependent with no chance of parole. Others can argue about the box-office stuff, awards, plots and the science and all the other peripheral fluff, but what makes SereniFly for me are the characters. They are so wonderful, real and their chemistry is palatable. And I don't think I've ever heard such great dialogue. That's what keeps me wanting more.

posted at September 9, 2006 09:05 PM

Cara wrote:

This was the best show on television... and like so many influential people in this world, it was killed off way to soon.

posted at September 10, 2006 04:34 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

Ray,
Maybe it's splitting hairs, but the stuff I've read suggests that Gail Berman (rather than "helped develop") brokered the deal that brought the BTVS-concept from the Kuzuis through Sandollar to the tiny screen. Maybe the subtler nuances of these complex transactions have already been explained in the hundreds of hours of AngelBuffyFirefly; in Out of Gas, Mal gets the pirate captain off his boat with the same angry words Joss reputedly said in parting from Graham Yost after Speed. If Gail Berman is caricatured anywhere in Firefly (as a treacherous middleman), my guess is Patience. But I'm only guessing.

Lenita,
Well said!

posted at September 10, 2006 07:20 PM

Sean Collins-Smith wrote:

I saw the movie when it came out, and was rooting for it to do well at the boxoffice. When it did only mediocre, I forgot about it for a while. When the movie came out a couple months later, I bought it AND the firefly box set together, and instantly fell in love with the series. I would kill to have this brought back on the air, it was ingenious, hilarious, and down-right fun.

posted at September 11, 2006 07:57 PM

Isaiah wrote:

Honestly i recall firefly on television, and avoiding it to watch some other new show that was airing at the time. I remember clicking to the show and instantly being turned off by the "space cowboys" i saw. Anyhow i watched the other show which for the life of me i cant recall. Anyways i caught the movie, and loved it. It wasnt til this week when Target offered the series on sale for 18.99 that i bought it. This show really is good. Sometimes its not that a show is bad, its timing, they way a show is advertised, or possibly the competition at the time. If i could travel back in time and correct my lack of support for this show i would.

posted at September 13, 2006 06:10 AM

Darlene wrote:

I can honestly say that I am not a Sci-Fi movie or show watcher, but when my son asked me to watch it I said I'd think on it. Well needless to say this 55 yr old mom was hooked. I watched all the series and then the movie Serenity. Why they cancelled this great show is beyind me when they can leave on a lot of junk. It's a shame on of the other networks didn't catch this big mistake, they could have had some great hit on htere hands. NBC needs some help, so whats wrong with your guys there.

posted at September 13, 2006 12:12 PM

Barbara Culver wrote:

I was happy to watch this show when I could find it. There were many episodes I missed because the show was bounced around like a Spauldine. When the boxed set came out I remembered the fun I had watching the series, and made sure I got the set. I enjoyed the movie except for the death of a main character, which I found unnecessary and more for shock value. Maybe it comes from years of finding shows I really love cancelled after one year, half a year, etc., especially when it comes to science fiction and/or horror that involves multi-facted anti-heroes with compromised/confused ethics. The most recent loss for me was "Invasion", and the most bitter cut was the cancellation of a truly dark little gem called "American Gothic". You never know what will become a success but some shows have characters that take time to appreciate and come in endless shades of grey, not just black and white. The people on "Firefly" shared that level of complexity and free-floating morality. It was what made them so real and human. It helped to make the show so memorable and worthwhile.

posted at September 14, 2006 06:25 AM

Esme wrote:

I see you have made an acquaintance with pisher. Good luck to you - you ultimately sinned by liking something he decided to hate. I don't know the movie and show as it hasn't been shown in my corner of the world yet, therefore I'm not entitled to any comments about its quality.

I left some years ago the (once) X-files board where pisher spends most of his time just because of what you got a sample here - incessant bickering about things he didn't like and denigrating of anybody who dares to disagree.

Better not to reply, else you won't have peace.

posted at September 14, 2006 12:05 PM

B wrote:

I watched this show when it first came on T.V. on a whim. I thought okay, this is different. And it was and I loved it. I thought it was smart, well written and fun and apparently so did a lot of others. But, like so many Fox shows before it, it was cancelled prematurely. Luckily we were given Serenity as a send off. I'd like to think that one day Fox will learn a lesson, but then again think of Family Guy and the mess they made when cancelling it and then having to bring it back. Idiots.

posted at September 15, 2006 04:49 PM

Barbara Seese wrote:

I accidentally found this web site through the IMDB, and just read through all the comments on "Firefly" and "Serenity". I watched "Firefly" from the beginning because the local TV newspaper critic is a big Joss Whedon fan, and he promoted the show every chance he got. I loved both the TV show and the movie--I thought maybe it was because I grew up in the Fifties when Westerns were very popular, and then I was around when the original "Star Trek" aired and got hooked on that. SciFi cowboys seem like a pretty logical combination to me! Speaking of Sandy Grushow and SciFi cowboys. . . I believe he was the same clod who canceled "The Adventures of Brisco County, Jr." Another entertaining show that combined the Western and SciFi genres. So glad for DVDs!

posted at September 15, 2006 08:02 PM

Ray wrote:

Pisher skulked off a while back now with his tail between his legs :^). Though I believe he has left a scathing 1 star attack, sorry... review of Serenity at Amazon UK. The arrogant and condescending tone makes very familiar reading.

posted at September 16, 2006 04:16 AM

shinyismymiddlename wrote:

I just want to say for starters that the entire fox corporation is made up of morons. The fox network is like the Sci-Fi Channel original movies. It's VERY rare to find something good enough to be shown twice. They go through TV shows like dental floss and yet, how many episodes were there of Temptaion Island? They had gold in their hands and their lunacy and their ignorance of their audience, alchemized the show into trash to be tossed out with every other script.
I'm getting my Dad into the show and he is very critical of his scifi. Eveyday he asks me, "Why the hell would anyone cancel this? It's SO good." And I explain how fox sabotaged it from the beginning.
I got into Firely last May. My friend got tickets to the extra advanced premiere. Despite being an avid Buffy fan, I never saw the show. I remeber only a vague commerical making it look like one of those shows that they only play on weekends like "Andromeda" or "Cleopatra Something Something". Serenity opened my eyes to something incredible.
I think that Joss Whedon was robbed of his opportunity to show the world his true brilliance. He was offered an inadequate and unstable venue with crappy advertisment and without a real chance to move up or gain the show's populairty. How often do cancelled shows find this many fans after it's gone?
Firefly is beautiful and funny, exciting, dramatic and more worthy of a healthy primetime spot than most shows that have been given twice as much time.
I am proud to call myself a Browncoat and delight in meeting others like me. I find those who believe in truth and honesty, who understand doing the right thing and not losing hope when things are at their worst. And our numbers grow everyday. How can a cancelled show about thieves can teach us to be better people?
"Cause I got people with me. People who care about eachother and not always looking for the advantage" -Malcolm Reynolds.
Oh, and to the jerks whining about Firefly and Serenity not being works of art: go back and watch the pilot. Look at the camera angles. Watch Shindig and take a look at the cultural and time period blending that put together those costumes, hell check out the floating chandelier. Listen to the music in the opening credits, study the inner design of the ship, watch River dance.
This show is swimming in art. There's sybolism everywhere you look, you just have to open yourself up and experience the beauty of it.
I'm sorry I'm ranting, but I'm so happy to have found something worthy of being passionate about. How can you not?

posted at September 17, 2006 12:37 AM

Christine wrote:

I sense a lot of hostility here. I understand everybody having an opinion, but I never thought it would get so heated over a cancelled tv show. So here's my opinion :) I love Joss Whedon, I'm a HUGE fan on Buffy and Angel, yet.....when I watched Firefly (DVD set) I never got into it. It was okay. Some episodes better then others; some characters better then others, but I just never fell in love with it. I understand how people could love it, and as Joss always said, he'd rather have 100 people who NEED to see it, rather then 1000 who like to see it. I think this show just falls into that realm.

posted at September 17, 2006 09:09 AM

Lori wrote:

I didn't watch this show on Fox. Why? Because I was FURIOUS over the cancellation of Dark Angel and I refused to watch another series just to have it taken away by Fox executives. I do, however, now own the box set. Excellent series. Such a shame.

posted at September 17, 2006 01:44 PM

Nicki wrote:

I loved Firefly and Serenity. Great characters, great writing, great actors. The entire cast ranks in my favorite actors category and the same is true of the show and movie.

Joss is Boss.

posted at September 17, 2006 02:36 PM

NightHawk wrote:

I loved FireFly from the first preview for the shows. I cursed Foxed when they cancelled it. I have since sent emails to fox every week to bring it back. I was thrilled when the "Serenity" came out. I was disappointed that the theme song for FireFly was not used in the movie. Maybe Fox owned the rights to it, don't know. They left the end of the movie so that I believe the series could continue without missing a beat or another followup movie could be made. Anyone know who to get in touch with Josh Whedon to campaign for the series continue or another movie? Please email me if you do.

posted at September 17, 2006 02:39 PM

Jeff Craig wrote:

I missed all the airings of Firefly while I was in the Persian Gulf - but I finally saw it when a friend got them on DVD after the movie came out. It just goes to show how stupid the exec's at Fox are! This series rocked!! It was well written, the visuals were top shelf and the characters gelled - it is so rare to see a show like this!

Now, that said, why hasn't SciFi optioned it from Fox as a mini-series or a gap series like USA has done with the 4400?

This is a symptom of what's gone wrong with this country. Everyone was in such a rush to get to the bottom line, that they completely overlooked at the results. This show was greater than the sum of it's parts. Something that media groups have a nasty tendency of overlooking. Folks, this is just another reason that media consolidation is very, very bad.

posted at September 17, 2006 03:59 PM

Bng wrote:

Book: St-Jayne? I think you have to perform three miracles...
Jayne: Once shot a man in the neck at 500 yards with a bent scope, that's gotta count fer something with the man upstairs.
Book: I'm sure it will be... considered.
Jayne: Well you made that kinda ominous soundin...

Browncoat for life.
Bng.

posted at September 18, 2006 05:20 AM

bethany wrote:

one of my all time favorite shows gone too soon...

posted at September 18, 2006 06:17 AM

Hedy wrote:

I wasn't lucky enough to catch this show while it aired, but a good friend turned me onto it last year and I LOVE it. FireFly is now my all time favorite and I too wish another network would continue the series.

posted at September 18, 2006 09:48 AM

NightHawk wrote:

Corruption of Sci-Fi Channel. The Sci-Fi channel is starting to import shows from USA channel such as wresting(ECW). Now someone tell me how is wrestling Sci-Fi, it is barely a competitive sport since most of it is fake. I see this as a disturbing trend and can only get worse.

posted at September 18, 2006 10:33 AM

clyde wrote:

Firefly was a good, not great show. The writing was better than most of the dreck currently broadcast and the acting worked as far as they could develop the characters in the time given. This was a bunch of unknowns that were better than the sum of its parts. Sets went from great aboard the ship to "how much dust can we pile up here", and the props were outright cheap.

As was mentioned above SciFi has always been a niche market. Most of the best of the genre have been syndicated because the networks just dont know how to handle them. Firefly would have done well on the SciFi network, heck they were able to make Farscape into a minor hit even though the writing was nowhere nearly as well done as it was here. One other issue is that for years it was only considered the realm of kids. This also hurts the entire genre.

I would also like to point out that quite a bit of the blame for the failure of this show has to fall on FOX. The X-files were almost canceled twice and that was really a mystery/drama with paranormal themes, not really sci-fi. Like X-Files, Firefly was bounced all over the schedule, making it almost impossible to find it in the same spot week after week. Hard to build a fan base when the fans cant find the show. Fox is also trigger happy as was noted above, from Family Guy, Arrested Development, Dark Angel, to possibly the best show ever killed by a network Profit. 24 may be a hit but hey there are still many who wait until the end of the season to watch it on DVD after missing more than 2 consecutive episodes. But somehow Fox can find a way to keep on utter junk. FOX - Where Quality Programing Goes to Die.

posted at September 18, 2006 12:10 PM

SC wrote:

I totally agree, that FIREFLY was an awesome series and that it was killed before it's time, I would love to see the series get picked up and continue on from where the movie left off. I know the movie just made me want to see even more. I had watched the whole box set before the movie. All the characters tie in to each other in some weird little mix that works and captivates their Audience. Fox doesn't always know what is best and FIREFLY is a perfect example. I say some other Network should have the guts to pick up FIREFLY and restart the series where the movie leaves off. Thank you for reading my little rant and rave!

posted at September 19, 2006 06:24 AM

Dave C. wrote:

Being one of the few that followed the original series and totally enjoying it I thought I would add a few comments.
The original concept for the show was brilliant, the chars and humor were quirky but well thought out and believable but the commercials originally released left you wondering what the show was about more than anything else - spaceships, horses, what the hell is this?!? If given a chance the show probably would have survived and gained a strong following but it had a couple of strikes going in - this show was aimed at teens and young adults and then was put in a time slot of fridays at 8pm, lol, fridays are the nights that most people of this age group are out releasing the energies from the week not sitting on a couch. So they say it had a good time slot since it took over X-files timeslot sheesh does anyone remember that X-files started on tuesday nites and only moved to fridays once it had gained an audience, and after the move to fridays was when it started to peter out! If Firefly had been on tues-thurs between 6-9pm we might still be watching it.
Sorry Josh but your song intro turned most people off right there, not a good move trying to put your audience to sleep in the first 30secs.
And while I did love the series I will readily admit it made more sense once I bought the dvd's and watched the show in order and yes the show did get bumped from its timeslot for the stupidest things at times so I would say that the TV station didnt do it many favors.
While I would spend my money to see another movie or watch anything new for it released on tv the sad thing is nothing will be released, Josh hated the way the show ended and always wanted to tie it up a little better and go out on the right foot, thankfully he was given that chance with the movie. Enjoy it or hate it but accept the fact that he has now moved on to other projects so unless one of us fans hits the mega-jackpot and hires him specifically to do this show again (fat chance)its done, final, the curtain has come down, so enjoy what we have!!
Remember we are now in the crap age of reality tv, its way cheaper for the studios to produce doesnt need any writers or story plots just a bunch of goofballs willing to be humiliated for a chance at a Million. So any show that has a high overhead for production costs which most sci-fi shows do, due to special effects, is already looking at an uphill battle and will be lucky to last more than a season nowadays but I digress, Josh I loved the show and movie! Thanks for giving us a glimpse at a gem of an idea and good luck with future projects

posted at September 19, 2006 07:45 AM

Kathleen wrote:

@Scott Ellington:
I am most interested in your repeated comments about all the reading and knowledge "Firefly" has led to for you. You seem almost to think of it as some sort of awakening "moment" in your life. While I would be interested in the comic books and magazines, etc, that you mentioned in one of your e-mails, I would also be interested to know what non-genre items your "Firefly" driven quest has led you to find. I am also a huge fan of the show (though not specifically of Whedon, as the only other things of his of which I am aware are "BUffy" and "Angel", neither of which I care for) Could you please list, chronologically if possible, but in any order you prefer, the results of your quest (including the "Firefly" specific items, as well as the non-genre items) which make you so passionate on this subject. I am interested personally, but also as a high school English teacher who is always looking for a good "hook" for my students, especially one that will lead them down many diverse yet surprinsingly connected roads.
@the rest of the "browncoats" on this site, I apologize for using your space for a personal message, but I also feel that some of these things could turn out to be of interest to all of us. As I've said, I am a huge fan, too, and hope against hope that we have not seen the end of these characters and their ship. And please stop egging on whiney weasels who are just trying to provoke. Let them have their say and move on.
Thanks for bearing with me.
Kat

posted at September 19, 2006 12:11 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

Kat,
First off: The Operative reminded me of Paladin so the first season of Have Gun - Will Travel felt like the way to ground conscience and duty/honor in a frontier context, for contrast. I found no conscience in The Operative, which led me naturally to consider soul as the source of something he was fresh out of...so the vampire with a soul needed visiting, along with A Man For All Seasons, Trevor Nunn's Macbeth (Burnham Quadrant/Birnam Wood), and Michael Radford's The Merchant of Venice, for Portia's quality of mercy. And while I was studying Angel, the final two seasons of Buffy needed scrutiny. Charles Gunn's pickup truck is an earlier incarnation of Mal's ship, complete with a stake-shooting machinegun and offensive accessories...but there are 11.5 seasons of prelude and interconnection with Firefly in Buffy and Angel. The sense of cross-over and intersection is actually mindblowing.
Browncoats at a couple of Firefly sites I frequent make valuable reccommendations, or I'd have missed two seasons of Deadwood in which David Milch presents an encyclopedic view of lawlessnes and order evolving in a span of months like an exotic epidemic.
I had to visit the releases of old Dick Cavett shows for a sense of where the acorn fell from; Tom Whedon (father of Joss) wrote for Cavett and is involved in an interview on the Comedy Legends anthology.
There are a couple of fascinating DVDs from Creative Screenwriting's Expo4 (Expo5 convenes next month in L.A.): "Joss Whedon, The Master at Play"; and Tim Minear "Breaking the Story". Jane Espenson (writer of Shindig) has a valuable blog that's aimed delightfully and specifically at WRITERS, watchers and readers.
The Sopranos is yet another amazing view of outlawry and the multi-faceted "family" that more and less resembles the crew of Serenity, depending upon your point of view.
And the credits at the end of every episode of Firefly cite names that demand exploration on the internet; Minear, Edlund, Greenberg, Molina, Cain, Matthews.
Pretty much every time Joss addresses the press, some new blast of bibleographical information leads to fascinating discoveries, and the attributed source of Firefly is Michael Shaara's The Killer Angels (made in 1989 into a fairly faithful 4hour film called Gettysburg). The animated Aeon Flux, The Wild Bunch, nearly all of Tarantino and Ridley Scott, Scorsese, Eastwood...
But because the primary hook is language in all of the products of Mutant Enemy, I looked to the people cited as Whedon's teachers at Wesleyan, Jeanine Basinger and Richard Slotkin; because it's too late and too expensive for me to get a more formal education.
SereniFly turned out to be a delightful catalyst to my epiphany. I hadn't read an entire book (that didn't involve an operating system) in twenty years.
I hope some of that was useful. Thanks for asking.

posted at September 19, 2006 10:37 PM

Scott Ellington wrote:

...and Lost, because HEY! David Fury!
Still, nothing else is Firefly.

posted at September 19, 2006 10:39 PM

Ray wrote:

Re:Dave.C, I beg to differ with a few of your views on Firefly, firstly that it was aimed at teens and young adults. There are alot of young fans of the show admittedly, and why not, but there are so many fans of the show who are in there 30s (myself) 40s and 50s onwards, many of who I chat to quite regularly. The shows many layers cater for a large age range, but there's no doubt it's screening time was totally unsuitable, but that was nothing less than deliberate.
The theme tune for Firefly I was surprised with when I 1st heard it over 3 years ago, but it grew on me very quickly and the Lyrics say pretty much everything about Malcolm Reynolds himself, and I now rate it as 'one of' the best theme tunes of any TV series' I've seen. If you want to hear some dull theme tunes you couldn't do much worse than Voyager or StarGate. Or if you want your ears to bleed, try Enterprise:)
Finally you seem to have a very defeatist view about a sequal or the series being picked up by another network. Whedon has moved on to other things yes, but then he has to make a living. He was never going to just sit around and wait for the phone to ring. At a recent Starfury festival Jewel Staite let slip a little on what Whedon has planned to happen in a sequal to Serenity. He also left a cryptic blog on Whedoneque a few weeks back which sounded quite promising to me. The curtain certainly hasn't come down yet.

posted at September 20, 2006 10:47 AM

TVChick wrote:

Best.Show.EVER. I continue to hold out hope that we've not seen the last of it. When I think of it truely being over, I can't help but cry a little. It was too good to be gone so soon.

posted at September 20, 2006 07:27 PM

samwise wrote:

Wow! I just spend an entertaining hour reading the thread of pros and cons about Firefly and Serenity. I am very proud that "light entertainment" can generate such intense dialogue and debate. As a theatre professor, I am constantly exposed to good stories and bad ones. I was and am a fan of Star Trek, Star Wars, and now the crew of the good ship Serenity. There are good things and bad things about all three of these, the best being the stories that make us happy, or sad, or giggle hysterically (It took me a while to pick myself up off the floor after Vera...).

Anyway, I guess all this old geezer is trying to say is: For good or for ill, I'm glad Firefly and Serenity came into my life. It makes me smile. As does this blog site. Keep up the good work and make 'er shiny...

posted at September 22, 2006 11:40 AM

Randi wrote:

The best, most original Sci Fi show EVER - shows why Joss Whedon needs to run a network. Creative, great dialog & characters, depth. Would love to see Sci Fi network fund some new episodes, instead of those B movies they show every weekend.

posted at September 25, 2006 09:56 AM

LsL wrote:

Like so many above, I watched Firefly in the proper sequence, in a marathon at home. I was in love, and I was sad that I might never see those characters again. Serenity was good--but it just reminded me again that I likely won't see Mal and company anymore :(
I bought the boxed set; I bought several of them and gave them as no-reason gifts to friends and family. So far, everyone loves it, too. I honestly don't know anyone who has watched the series and does NOT like it.

Guess I gotta watch Buffy and Angel now..lots of catching up to do.

posted at September 25, 2006 05:08 PM

Natasha wrote:

I was a Joss fan, and followed both Buffy and Angel, but I did not even think about watching Firefly back when it aired on TV. The reason being, is I just did not know about it, and what I did just did not appeal to me. I think I might need to be slapped. Firefly is by far better then Buffy and Angel (and I love both of those shows dearly), but Firefly is in a class of its own, it was just that good. I watched the first episode when Sci-Fi aired the series and had to go get the DVD set, as I could not wait to see it all. This is the one show that I feel deserves so much more.

posted at September 26, 2006 11:39 AM

Persononfire wrote:

When I first saw the show years ago on fox, I loved it right from the start. It's rare I like a show enough to actually make a point to watch it every week. Years later after the movie came out, I went an rewatched the DVDs. Loved it AGAIN. In fact, every single person I've ever shown this series to has LOVED IT. It always baffled me how it got cancelled... I liked the movie alot aswell, but there's no doubt it wasn't quite as good as the show. Namely, I think it lacked a few things the show had that I thought were amazing. Firsly, in the show, all the outside space scenes have absolutely -no- sound. No explosions, no engine noises.... Because, of course, sound waves cannot travel across a vaccuum! That attention to detail really got me back with the show. I wish the show could have been done how it was intended to be. The plot was slow developing, but each episode was enthralling. The perfect mix of action, comedy and drama. Maybe I'm the only person that does this, but honestly, sometimes I get to thinking about the show, I stop... sigh and say "Damn, I miss Firefly..."

posted at October 5, 2006 10:56 AM

cyeeyore wrote:

I am posting here for one reason only. I stumbled across this page, while looking for another show, which is irrelevant to the topic.
Being among the fan base that have found many of FOXs shows to be enjoyable, only to be disappointed in the effort to find the show each week, and if it missed a week, if it too has been shit-canned like so many fine shows they have premiered and cancelled.

Yeah sure I would love to see more of Firefly/Serenity. But it is not likely that my opinion matters much to the studios/networks, because I don't put my dollars behind it.

I don't own the DVDs, and in all likelihood I wont buy them.

Serenity is a prime example, of the fact that people do not like to pay for something that they believe they should be given for free. IE a TV show being made into a movie.

Star Trek (again a devoted fan here) should have taught that lesson to many others. You can over do something that should be allowed to perish.

Star Trek once a great classic sci-fi show, has been done and redone and revamped so many times, that I doubt any of the original cast members have a clue who are allies and who are enemies of the Federation.

Star wars, yeah I loved them all, but I gotta say it would have been so much better had the movies been released in order. Each movie is great on its own, but as a story line, it is absurd to know the finale, when you first glimpse a show. Hello!!?? Do you read the last page in a book and then decide to read the whole thing?

See I too can be quite opinionated.

But the only opinion I post here worth mentioning, is for PISHER

You have far far too much time on your hands, get a grip, quit arguing points with devotees, they will never share your opinion. So stop sharing it!!!

Just had to post to get that one off my chest, and for the record don't bother flaming me, odds are I will never wind up on this board again. Though pisher you do seem to enjoy exercises in futility posting a retort should be right up your alley.

Peace, and try a little Serenity in your life.

posted at October 12, 2006 09:30 PM

Hank McCoy wrote:

"Fashion House",just might go off after 3 months worth of episoces!

posted at October 22, 2006 12:47 AM

TDAWG wrote:

What a drag. Saw "Serenity" on DVD and loved it! Wished I'd seen it in the theatre. Then Sci-Fi Channel played the marathon (weren't there 3 or 4 missing eps at the end?) and REALLY liked it. I realized that if I'd started watching it when it was on tv I would have liked it, but my initial - its a space western - write up made me pass. Don't judge a book... I don't like FOX, as someone said earlier, they are WAY to quick to pull the plug on shows. "The Inside" ring a bell? SIGH. Whedon said recently that "Serenity" would not have a sequel. I can get that. Now that I've seen the movie AND the series, I can see that the movie was kind of a gift to the fans. Peace!

posted at November 13, 2006 03:07 PM

Pat wrote:

I was not aware of this show when it first aired, and was warned by my friends that if I got hooked, I would feel the disappointment of the small number of episodes. They were right.

But, then, there are other shows I liked that were short lived - anyone remember "The Chronicle?" My family loved that show.

I guess since I am not into reality tv I exist outside the mainstream. Oh well. At least I have my dvds. 8-)

posted at November 29, 2006 07:21 AM

Jon L wrote:

I remember seeing ads on Fox for Firefly, half watching "the Train Job" episode (while I did some homework) when it aired, and not being impressed. I was a fan of both Buffy and Angel, but Firefly never grabbed me, and I never even found the following episodes to give it a second chance. The show was cancelled and I was rather pleased with myself for not getting into it. I even ripped on the guy behind the counter of a comic book shop when he reccommended the newly released DVD box set. I knew better... If Firefly had been any good it wouldn't have been cancelled, obviously. Who were these idiotic people online talking about this lame, now dead, show?
That Christmas my father in law gives me the very Firefly DVDs I scoffed at earlier. I politley accepted them and they sat on my shelf for a good month. Then one day there was nothing on tv and I popped in disc one... and actually paid attention.
SWEET MERCIFUL CR*P!!! this was one the best written shows I have ever seen! The writing, the effects, the acting (what blind and deaf jack@$$ has been ripping on the acting?)... all of it was outstanding. And belive you me, I am one picky SOB. I can tear apart almost any movie or TV show with ease, but Firefly (and Serenity) was as close to perfect as I have ever seen. When ads for Serenity came out later I was the happiest sci-fi geek on the face of the planet, only to know the greater pleasure of seeing the film later.
Thanks

posted at November 29, 2006 02:16 PM

Craig wrote:

I'm a huge sci-fi fan. With that being said, I hate most of the sci-fi shows that were ever aired. My main problem is that I'm a die-hard Star Trek fan. I've seen every episode of every series, starting from the original, Next Gen, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, the animated original (Remember BEM?) and all movies. As a result, I've been forced to base all subsequent Sci-Fi shows on the Star Trek premise and they never do it for me. Mind you, I've never been to ST convention and am do not play D&D. Firefly, Babylon 5, Stargate and even Threshold, Invasion and Surface were all terrible in my opinion. I did not care for the Firefly movie either - the cowboy theme seemed corny to me.

Actually, as I type this, I am remembering a few shows that I did like: Quantum leap, 7 Days (remember that one?) and Sliders (the first season only). If you consider Heroes Sci-Fi, then that's a hit in my book as well. I've always been facinated with time travel, but it's got to make sense. Did any see the Lake House? Ehhhh - definately some questions left there. As far as books on time travel are concerned, I highly suggest 'Up the line' and 'Dragons Egg'. Sorry, slightly off topic, but let me know if you agree or disagree!

posted at November 30, 2006 08:08 AM

Ray wrote:

RE Craig:"I'm a huge sci-fi fan. With that being said, I hate most of the sci-fi shows that were ever aired." No, I disagree with that for a start, you're a huge "Star Trek" fan, not a Sci Fi fan. To describe all those shows you mentioned as terrible and call your self a sci fi fan is ludicrous. Sounds to me that you made your decisions not to like those shows before you even sat down to watch them, because they weren't Star Trek or about time travel.
The original Star Trek series was, and still is, a milestone in TV, it's still watchable even today, dodgey sets and all. The same cannot be said about The Next Generation onwards, and I really cannot understand anyone who raves about a set of spin offs that have been so mind numbingly dull for so many years. It's an irony that Data - the android, was and still is the most human like character in all of the new Star Trek series.
I'm not a big fan of all the shows you mentioned either. Star Gate used to be rather good early on, but it's gradually turned into Star Trek, if it wasn't really Star Trek in a different coat in the 1st place.
B5 was a great favourite of mine, it had realistic and humourous characters, epic storylines and the effects improved with each series. Farscape went further than B5 with characterisation and humour albeit with a slightly less epic feel. Both with no meaningless technobabble I might add.
Surface also had great potential before it was axed, the final episode leaving many unanswered questions. I can't comment on Threshold but I waited for weeks for something to happen in Invasion, but very little did.
With Firefly, Whedon created something years ahead of anything else, it still is. Shock, horror, it's actually about people, who behave like real human beings, and who have to make difficult decisions. They do things like eat around a table, tell funny stories, try to find a job, and occasionally shoot other people.
I'm not saying you should stop watching Star Trek, but there's so much more to Science Fiction than tachyon field generators, anomalies and time travel. It's your loss, nobody elses.

posted at November 30, 2006 10:30 AM

Craig wrote:

Ray - Perhaps you are correct about my fan status. Maybe I enjoy the 'idea' of Sci-fi, but really focus on certain aspects. However, I stand by my opinions - I just couldn't get into Firefly and the others I mentioned. Thanks for the input.

posted at November 30, 2006 01:37 PM

Daniel wrote:

Well im new to the firefly series i mean i watched the movie serenity and i really enjoyed then i stumbled on to firefly. Watched the first episode and thought why the hell was it canceled its on level with lost, prison break yes even Heroes.

posted at June 3, 2007 12:02 PM

Kate wrote:

Well I adored (and own multiple sets of) both Firefly and Serenity. It appealed to me in a way that Buffy and Angel didn't. I now own a considerable amount of spin off merchandise as well - books, t-shirts, cds etc. Someone must be making money to produce all these spin-offs 2 years after the film was released and argues a considerable and still existing fan base. Considering how few episodes aired, that's quite an achievement for a cancelled show.

posted at June 22, 2007 07:57 PM