posted
For some stupid reason, I never bothered to watch Firefly...for years. Last night, two of my friends had me come over for nachos and then put the pilot episode on. After being totally enthralled and then having Firefly-themed dreams all night, I think it's safe to say that I'm hooked. They let me borrow the DVDs. I might have a hard time giving them back.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
My sister recommended Firefly and even sent me her DVD's. My daughter and I are loving it. I'll have to buy my own when I send my sister's back... because I must have them in my house at all times.
Posts: 239 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seriously. I can't believe that something this good was created by the Buffy guy. I know Buffy has a ton of fans, but I always just found it to be kinda "eh." You know? Entertaining enough, but not worthy of going ga-ga over.
Firefly is a different story.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, a lot of what germinated in Buffy (and to some degree in Angel) can be seen in Firefly. Firefly is a lot more "grown up".
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sad to say, I've been tempted to write what would surely be a poorly written fan fic of Firefly.
Posts: 9754 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've never seen Firefly. I did rent Serenity, and I thought it was pretty good. But I haven't seen the TV show.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was a little underwhelmed by it after all the hype. This pretty much sums it up:
Cowboys... in... SPAAAAAAAACE!
Complete with real cows and semi-authentic western-wear.
The characterization was better than you might expect, but it was not the Second Coming of Star Tracks.
Posts: 196 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Star Trek just isn't on the same level as Firefly. Actually, no TV show or sci-fi movie is on the same level as Firefly.
Serenity annoyed me though. The story was good, but something about it was just different. I'm not sure what. I think Simon was different in some way. And the ending made me wish I'd never gone to see the movie in the first place. I couldn't believe Joss Whedon would do something like that.
Posts: 464 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: No, it's considerably better than Star Trek.
Thank you! I don't know Star Trek well enough to make that judgement, but from the few I have seen, Firefly is quite a bit better. Or at least fits my tastes much better. The dialogue is what makes it my favorite show. Plots and effects are a dime a dozen, but the correct combination of words to make a witty, apropo, intelligent statement is rare, and Firefly is a gold mine.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: No, it's considerably better than Star Trek.
Not to be rude but it only lived through one season and Star Trek has lastest 40 Years. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would disagree with you on this one. I actually liked Serenity, and I have been starting to watch the TV show but I'm kind of disappointed after watching the first episode. I hope it gets better the more episodes they made, cause if not I know why it got booted off the air.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: No, it's considerably better than Star Trek.
Not to be rude but it only lived through one season and Star Trek has lastest 40 Years. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who would disagree with you on this one. I actually liked Serenity, and I have been starting to watch the TV show but I'm kind of disappointed after watching the first episode. I hope it gets better the more episodes they made, cause if not I know why it got booted off the air.
* edited for spelling*
It does get considerably better as they go on. I think for me, it took the fourth episode, and then after I watched the series, I watched the first ones and enjoyed them much more.
I agree with Tom. While Star Trek has more episodes Firefly had characters that were more human/real, with better written plots.
Anytime the writers had to fill in a gap in TNG, the Holodeck suddenly had a malfunction. How many times did Picard and Kirk act as an emmisary for when two planets were at war for 500+ years, and they had to teach that culture a lesson and end it for the sake of avoiding Genocide? How many times did Q have to show up in order to show us that, no, Picard really does have some depth to him, and yes, he is a perfect human being.
Posts: 116 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Firefly had more character development in 14 episodes than Star Trek managed in four complete series (I'm purposefully leaving out DS9, here). It was also funnier, more coherently plotted and emotionally resonant, did not rely on technobabble in any fashion, and presented an interesting and original vision of the future. Sure, maybe it would've jumped the shark after episode 15, but in those first 14 episodes, we got some of the best written and acted sci-fi ever to hit television. Not a single mediocre episode among them.
And this is coming from someone who credits Star Trek as the franchise that got me interested in sci-fi in the first place. Firefly really is just that good. And so was Serenity.
(Although I'll disagree with Libbie's appraisal of Buffy. Both Buffy and Angel were, although not quite as consistently excellent as Firefly, extraordinarily well-written shows with fantastic casts and a very human center. I'd easily rank "Once More With Feeling," "The Body," "Smile Time," and "Not Fade Away" up there with "Out of Gas" and "Objects in Space.")
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've seen almost every episode of TNG twice, all of them period at least once, and the same with DS9.
In my opinion, the very very best individual episodes in each series-with a higher percentage in DS9-compare with most of the episodes of Firefly. As for TOS, I just have a difficult time getting past Shatner, the horrible costumes and sets-by modern standards-Shatner, some of the sillier costumes, and Shatner, to give it a fair shot, honestly.
But to be equally honest, Star Trek is an entirely genre within a genre of sci-fiction. To my recollection, there is exactly one episode dealing entirely with the ship's engine failing and needing repair in Firefly, while that plus subplots describes some dozens of episodes from the four (five, now) series of Star Trek.
Star Trek focuses a great deal more with the 'sci' in 'sci-fi' compared to Firefly, despite the routinely laughable technobabble. While I find such stories fascinating, they just don't grab my face and make me pay attention the way the fiction part of 'sci-fi' does...which is almost entirely what Firefly focuses on.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I've seen two or three episodes of Firefly, and they were good, but considering all the raving I'd heard...well, eh. And I remember some really, really good episodes of various Star Trek series (particularly DS9).
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Palliard: I was a little underwhelmed by it after all the hype. This pretty much sums it up:
Cowboys... in... SPAAAAAAAACE!
Complete with real cows and semi-authentic western-wear.
The characterization was better than you might expect, but it was not the Second Coming of Star Tracks.
I've heard that from everybody who watched it in the order it was aired on Fox. Everybody I know who's seen it in the intended order loved it.
but yeah, COWBOYS...IN...SPAAAAAAACE! sums up an awful lot of it. But it's fun! And it's incredibly well-done cowboys in space, so why not? Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:And the ending made me wish I'd never gone to see the movie in the first place. I couldn't believe Joss Whedon would do something like that.
I think Joss Whedon loves to tear out people's hearts and jump on them. It's his favourite sport.
Well, I thought the bit of A Game of Thrones where Eddard Stark gets ... in front of his own daughters was just BRILLIANT writing, so maybe I'll love Serenity. Heehee.
Edit: oops...edited to remove spoilers for those few souls who still haven't read ASOIAF.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: (Although I'll disagree with Libbie's appraisal of Buffy. Both Buffy and Angel were, although not quite as consistently excellent as Firefly, extraordinarily well-written shows with fantastic casts and a very human center. I'd easily rank "Once More With Feeling," "The Body," "Smile Time," and "Not Fade Away" up there with "Out of Gas" and "Objects in Space.")
Chalk it up to my natural annoyance with anything having to do with vampires. I really think vampires are a huge yawnfest. That probably colors my perception of the Buffy-centric shows quite a bit, to be honest.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tarrsk: (Although I'll disagree with Libbie's appraisal of Buffy. Both Buffy and Angel were, although not quite as consistently excellent as Firefly, extraordinarily well-written shows with fantastic casts and a very human center. I'd easily rank "Once More With Feeling," "The Body," "Smile Time," and "Not Fade Away" up there with "Out of Gas" and "Objects in Space.")
Chalk it up to my natural annoyance with anything having to do with vampires. I really think vampires are a huge yawnfest. That probably colors my perception of the Buffy-centric shows quite a bit, to be honest.
Oh, I wasn't (and still am not) interested in the mythology of vampires in general, either. I get a similar yawnfest reaction from Dracula, Nosferatu, Anne Rice and the like. The thing about Buffy and Angel is that they do two unique things with the hokey premise: (a) they use it (along with horror movie tropes in general) as a springboard to discuss universal themes of growing up, what it means to be an adult, etc, and (b) they're taking the piss as often as they are using the mythos seriously. More often, really. Nothin' better than seeing Spike complain about Dracula being an egotistical idiot who only got famous because he got some girl to write a semi-fictionalized biography, and stupidly informed the humans about the easy ways to kill vampires in the process. Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think you can say "Firefly" is "better" than "Star Trek," or vice versa. It's totally subjective, and arguing about it is somewhat ridiculous. Some shows speak to you, resonate with you, and they pull you in. Some don't. No reason to crit people for it.
"Star Trek" was my first exposure to science fiction when I was a kid back in the early 70's. Loved the show, and I hunted out the novels that were just starting to come out. That led to wanting to read every other science fiction book in the world, and over the years I've made a fair run at it.
"Star Trek," the original, was a huge jump forward for its time. Bright and colorful (the better to promote the new color TVs), it was relentlessly positive in its portrayal of the future. Humans hadn't blown each other up, they were getting together in multiracial crews, Asians and blacks and women were (nearly) equal in status to white males -- for the late 60's broadcast TV anyway -- and major crises were solved by ingenuity and personal initiative. There was drama, there was humor, there was cool special effects (for the time), and there was some great writing.
The original "Star Trek" could not work today. Too brass, too corny, too over-the-top. But science fiction television grew from it, built on it, and it remains a powerful force in pop culture and science fiction.
I love "Star Trek," always will. And I've enjoyed a lot of science fiction on TV in the years since. But when "Firefly" came out, I was blown away.
Loved the writing. Loved the characters. Love the settings and situations and humor and drama. And I loved, loved, loved the fact that they took almost no writing shortcuts whatsoever.
No aliens to provide easy plots or shaded metaphors. There is a minimum of technobabble. Only one "ship breaks down" episode, and it gets used to further define every crewmember a background. None of the inconsistencies suggested by logical extrapolitions of "Star Trek's" teleporter and replicators and, later, holodecks. No sound in space. Tighter plots. Fewer "why don't they...?" moments. Fewer moments where you get peeved at the characters and yell for them to do something obvious; usually they would do what a reasonably clever person (i.e. someone who is not a TV character) would do, or they would do something even better you hadn't thought of. And then, unlike the original "Star Trek" and most other TV shows ever made, the consequences of those actions would matter.
And to me, the real breakthrough was that this was a family, a group of people I could identify with. I am not a Jedi. I would never make it through Starfleet Academy. I am not a religious leader or political leader or diplomat or fighter pilot, and while I can enjoy watching their stories I don't really identify with them. "Firefly" is about a guy trying to get a job and keep his rundown transportation going, despite hardships and different moral choices in tough situations, all with humor and style, and I can completely identify with that.
I like 'em both, and enjoy them in different ways. If I had to grab something to watch, though, I'd grab "Firefly."
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Only one "ship breaks down" episode, and it gets used to further define every crewmember a background.
And to make me cry like a baby.
Anyway, the reason I think that Firefly is good is because Joss Whedon's goal was to make a show that he thought portrayed exactly what humanity would be like if we did live spread out over a galaxy. He tried to make it as realistic as possible in every way. He obviously studied a lot of history and politics in preparation for making the show, and put a huge deal of thought into it. He deserves major credit for that.
Posts: 464 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Teshi, do you remember that thread in which you posted your ongoing reactions to Firefly as you watched each episode for the first time? I can't remember what it was called, and I'm not having any luck finding it, but it you can search it out it probably deserves a bump.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, I have now seen all the Firfly episodes made and it is actually a pretty good show. Better than Star Trek, no. But there really wasn't enough material there to make an actual judgement either. I'm actually kind of sad that it didn't stay on TV, I thought it was going in a pretty cool direction.
Posts: 871 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
I'd forgotten about that thread. It's so strange to go back and read all our conversations. Ah, back in the day.
Some of what I said, summed up for people who don't want to read the whole thread:
quote:This kind of sums up the only thing that bothers me, or rather my more gentle side; to Mal, it's not even about honour or self-defence, it's about picking a fight. I know, I know, it's his character, but he needs a good smack upside the head.
quote:Anyway. Very scary. Will not be watching this one twice!
I am such a wuss. To this day, I haven't watched Bushwacked more than once.
quote:The dialogue is so clean, I still can't get over it!
quote:8. "Out of Gas"
Sublime.
quote:Favourite Line, was a great stereotype-smasher: (from Mal to Jayne, Wash and Zoe) "No I don't!" For spoiler reasons, I cannot explain any further than that. Watch the episode. It's at the end.
quote:My guess [for Book] would be an Alliance side hero general shocked at what he had done, entered into a monastery for penance and then exited so many years later only to hook up with Serenity and crew. This would give him the weight, the bargaining skills and the tactical/weapons skills he seems to have.
HA.
quote:All in all, it's like a sapling cut off half way up the trunk by vandals, what happened to Firefly.
Also: I think I was way funnier back then than I am now. I've grown crotchety in my old age!
quote:Tighter plots. Fewer "why don't they...?" moments. Fewer moments where you get peeved at the characters and yell for them to do something obvious; usually they would do what a reasonably clever person (i.e. someone who is not a TV character) would do, or they would do something even better you hadn't thought of.
To be fair though, I have this theory about plots and magic. Anytime your introduce superpowers (whether it be in the form of Slayers in Buffy or Technowizardry in Star Trek) you make the plot inherently unstable with a lot of holes. My idea is kind of like Godwin's Law. As the total number of superpowers introduced and number of episodes increase, the probability of a valid "Why don't they just do ______?" moment approaches 1.
P=(k^(1/n)) for k < 1 P = probability of the "Why don't they just do ______?" moment n = the number of episodes in the series k = a constant less than one that is larger based on the nature and number of the superpowers.
That's one reason I think Firefly had such tight plots- no magic, no aliens, not a whole lot of superpowers floating around. River was the closest thing, and since she was so unstable it actually helped to counteract any potential holes in the plot.
Posts: 1412 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BaoQingTian: Or in Mal's case, no pants at one point (Trash I believe).
I always wondered why Mal was so uncaring about his nudeness in front of others, but the rest of the crew did not share the sentiment. It would have been very interesting if all the crew had simply not cared he was naked.
2 other things I always wondered about. The culture had basically merged with Asian cultures, and mandarin was spoken by everyone (ignoring the fact River is staring at Japanese katakana in the beginning of Serenity) there was a Russian master criminal an Austrailian black market dealer, Americans, why were there no Asian major or even minor characters. I imagine this was really a matter of Firefly being canceled so early. I am quite confident that within the 2nd season there would have been more Asian characters in the show.
The other thing I wonder about, whats the deal with insane black villains on the show? Probably coincidence.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The lack of Asians has been remarked upon. The theory I like is that we didn't see a lot of the core worlds, and Asians (in this future) were upper class. As proof, I submit that many of the upper class characters had Asian surnames. River and Simon Tam, Atherton Wing, etc.
The insane black villains are, I think, coincidence. In both cases Joss praised the actors' work before they were hired.
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:posted by B34N: Not to be rude but [Firefly] only lived through one season and Star Trek has lastest 40 Years.
I missed this thread the first time around. This quote caught my attention.
I actually prefer when shows only last a season or two. It's a good amount of time to with which to develop characters without them getting ludicrous. That goes for plot too, assuming there's some sort of overarching story. I think Firefly could have used another season to wrap up the plot (absent Serenity), but I doubt even Mr. Whedon could have kept it up after that and still have the show maintain it's emotional power.
As another example, a lot of the best anime - Cowboy Bebop, Trigun, Neon Genesis Evangelion - only ran one season. Fullmetal Alchemist did two. I compare that with shows like Naruto which really interested me - for the first 40 episodes. After that I just realize that the writers are incapable of bringing a character beyond two-dimensionality, and have no intention of bringing the story to a satisfying ending. Or any ending at all, for that matter.
I much prefer to say goodbye to something I love than to watch it turn into someone's little plastic cash-cow.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I actually prefer when shows only last a season or two. It's a good amount of time to with which to develop characters without them getting ludicrous.
Doesn't this depend almost entirely on the quality of the writers involved, not as you imply something inherent in a lengthy series? I think for example about Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, or BtVS, or Angel, or Band of Brothers-where, to be fair, the meat and potatoes of the story didn't have to be created, it was history.
Gargoyles was good stuff until the whole Goliath Chronicles garbage. So is Smallville, though admittedly it has its ups and downs. The list goes on and on, I think.
And as for Naruto, a show I'm a fan of, I'm not really sure how its primary cast gets the label 'two-dimensional'. Granted, each of the three primary characters is ambitious in one singular way which doesn't change-which isn't really true, actually-but that's really the way some people are, isn't it? Dedicated people, I mean.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not to be rude but it only lived through one season and Star Trek has lastest 40 Years.
So let's look at that. Star Trek came out, had two rocky years, only had a partial third year because of the an intense letter-writing campaign by its loyal and somewhat obsessive fans, and was then canceled. Fans kept talking about it, writing their own stories, mimeographing newsletters and mailing them to each other, and finally holding conventions to talk about the shows. Interest grew, original books were commissioned, the scripts were novelized, the show went into syndication, a cartoon was made, many more original novels were written, and 11 years later a movie was made which kicked off a movie franchise and more TV shows, all because of the passion of the fans for a canceled TV show.
Firefly only had 14 episodes but it got a movie a lot faster. Who's to say what will happen in ten years?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Doesn't this depend almost entirely on the quality of the writers involved, not as you imply something inherent in a lengthy series?
You're right, I should have made myself clearer. Of course the quality of the writers matters. How not? But when you're dealing with the same characters, there's only so much you can do with them. The same with an overarching plot. That's why, I think, so many shows end up repeating themselves. I've even noticed this in shows that I think are worthwhile, like Scrubs.
I guess what I'm saying is that while length doesn't necessitate bad quality, it's been a relatively reliable indicator to me in the past.
Star Trek worked for so long because because its fans loved the universe first and foremost, so the show could survive multiple incarnations. I'd argue that Firefly without Mal and the crew wouldn't be Firefly.
As for Naruto, I watched something like 150 episodes before I just gave up. It was disheartening to see a show I liked (I still think the first storyline with Zabuza and Haku was exceptional) fall victim so severely to DBZ syndrome. At some points you could just see the writers reaching for their DBZ handbooks. *Twitch*, speak, scene change! Granted, it's better animated than DBZ ever was, and some of the fight scenes are spectacluar; I'm thinking specifically of Sasuke v. Orochimaru during the chunin exam, and nearly any Brock Lee fight.
But by episode 40 I suspected they were using filler so as not to get ahead of the manga. By the time I stopped watching, I knew nothing about the characters I didn't know by episode 60 or so.
Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: The other thing I wonder about, whats the deal with insane black villains on the show?
I mean, there's also like Shepard and Zoe...
The comment was more of a wink at the coincidence that the villain in the SPOILER ALERT last episode of Firefly was an insane black bounty hunter. In Serenity it was an insane black assassin.
They never killed the one in Firefly and in Serenity that one was merely exiled. You could have a character who is the target of both, one wants to capture him/her the other wants to kill him/her to gain redemption.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm discounting the filler of course, Juxtapose. The large majority of it is garbage. That's episodes 115ish?-current, I can't recall when exactly they start. Then again, I stay completely away from the Cartoon Network versions-the voice dubbing is terrible. Like, MST3000 bad.
The formulaic way a bunch of it is done is tiresome, I give you that.
---------
While the bounty hunter was arguably insane, I think one of the points of Serenity was that the Operative wasn't insane, or deluded.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
