GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

The Movie Sucked

POSTED BY: ADLAI
UPDATED: Sunday, January 8, 2006 20:36
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 6126
PAGE 1 of 2

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:18 PM

ADLAI


I loved Firefly, don't get me wrong. It was some of the best television that I've ever seen, and the dialogue rivals that of early West Wing it's so good.

Serenity left me cold. Everything is so blue and the characters are similarly cold.

The strength of Firefly was that it was a Western dressed as Sci-Fi. It wasn't really sci-fi. Well, in the movie the sci-fi is amped up to there, while the Western is completely mute.

Probably the best metaphor for the movie would have to be the Prince of Persia games. Prince of Persia Sands of Time is I think the best game ever. But it didn't sell well for whatever reason, mostly due to poor marketing. In response, the next game, Warrior Within, had the sex and violence upped to 11... and it sucked because the charm of the game was gone.

This movie is like that. A second metaphor would be the killing of Wash. Wash was the unathletic Hawaian shirt wearing guy who was quirky and funny. Well, I guess the new Firefly has no room for him; he gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character. The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.


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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:23 PM

CAUSAL


Oh, there's so much to respond to, but I'll limit myself.

#1: Wash wasn't killed because there was no place for him. Joss killed him because he wanted a real sense of danger in the final battle scene (and Joss is, of course, all about provoking real emotion). The standard come back to this is, "Well, why'd he have to kill of WASH?!?" Answer: don't know (but would you like some cheese with that whine?).

#2: Believe it or not, some people still have not seen Serenity, so it would be really good to put "spoiler" or some such in the thread title.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Editted to add: also, on a Firefly/Serenity type board, having the title "The Movie Sucked" is just aksing to be flamed and/or ignored. More flies with honey...

________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:35 PM

NUCKLES87


While I am hoping the flaming is kept down here, I do have to disagree.

Serenity represented where Firefly was headed. Sure, the western theme was gone, but the western theme was mostly found on the outer worlds, places that the crew had very little time to visit in a three hour movie. Firefly was scifi dressed up with western nuances, not the other way around.

Serenity was what it was supposed to be: emotionally provoking. A huge finale for the Firefly story. People died, battles where fought. Joss did his very best to pull at the emotional strings of the fans and the viewers. And your anger at him towards killing Wash is proof that he accomplished what he set out to do. Kill a character that people cared about, and make them grieve.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:35 PM

NUCKLES87


While I am hoping the flaming is kept down here, I do have to disagree.

Serenity represented where Firefly was headed. Sure, the western theme was gone, but the western theme was mostly found on the outer worlds, places that the crew had very little time to visit in a three hour movie. Firefly was scifi dressed up with western nuances, not the other way around.

Serenity was what it was supposed to be: emotionally provoking. A huge finale for the Firefly story. People died, battles where fought. Joss did his very best to pull at the emotional strings of the fans and the viewers. And your anger at him towards killing Wash is proof that he accomplished what he set out to do. Kill a character that people cared about, and make them grieve.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:35 PM

MATTIE


I have one word for you: Troll!
Causal is right, you catch more flies with honey!
If you saw the intro that Joss did, you should take his advice and lay low, be quiet, don't speak for a long, LONG time.


Wacky fun!

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:38 PM

NDRAGE85


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:


I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.




why wouldn't Simon be able to do any of that? in the series he did everything for River. He gave up everything and he did anything he could to protect her. In "Safe" he was ready to die along with her. So i don't see any of that as outlandish. and since when did that "grenade", as you put it, that he shoots off in the facility become complicated?

and Inara and the flash gernade makes perfect sense. it's just another companion trade secret. they were referenced in the show and Joss has often talked about them. just like the syringe in the pilot episode. companions have all sorts of tricks to protect themselves. they're companions, they have to have a way to protect themselves. it loses part of its allure to have a gone strapped to their side. that is why they have other means.

on a side-note though, i do understand your complaints about the loss of the western feel in the movie. while i don't see it the same way you do, i understand what you're saying.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:42 PM

LOOKATTHATBIRD


I completely agree with you. I mean, I kind of liked the movie. I liked it much more the second time, seeing it again I focused less on the plot and more on the little things so I realised the characters had changed less than I thought originaly. But everything you said is so true. The whole blue thing was the worst. The show was all earthy and warm, at least when they were on the ship. The movie just felt bad. It was unsettleing. And since when is Mal so angry? And so disconcerned with the wellfare of his crew?

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:45 PM

ADLAI


What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:48 PM

OMELET


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:


A second metaphor would be the killing of Wash. Wash was the unathletic Hawaian shirt wearing guy who was quirky and funny. Well, I guess the new Firefly has no room for him; he gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character. The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!

If this series is really going to the Sci-Fi network, it looks like they're going to make it into a poor Farscape clone. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.



Firstly, It's not Enora, it's Inara.

Secondly, It was a typical thing for Inara to do because, if you listened to the commentary that was so brilliant by director Joss Whedon, then you would have learned that Inara was raised in the Alliance and nothing is what it appears. Yes she is a physically weak person compared to Mal, but she is clever and is constantly thinking the next moved through in her mind. Not only that, but she intuitively knows these things because of her Companion training, as mentioned by Joss as well. The ability to know when danger was coming was something second nature to her.

Thirdly, Simon only got into that fist fight because he was being a protective older brother to River. He was angry that she could have gotten killed and took his anger out on the one responsible person there, Mal. I wouldn't put it past Simon to be physical if he had to be. The so-called "Secret Operative" that you label Simon was also present in Firefly. Remember he was the one who designed the plan to steal from Ariel, not Mal or Zoe. Simon is quite protective of River, as shown in the episode Safe and Objects in Space. He was willing to beat up somebody to get his sister back or keep her safe. Also, it was mentioned that Simon was the one who busted River out of the place she was being held captive in Serenity, the pilot episode.

Fourthly, Serenity is a darker film than the Firefly series. Wash had to die to build that arc for Zoe and to make the movie more realistic so that it would appear that all of them might actually die. Alan Tudyk was even in on this decision, so it wasn't solely up to Joss. Yes Wash was beloved, but that doesn't mean that just because the "funny man who wears Hawaiin shirts" dies means that there won't be any more quirkyness when the show comes back or when the next movie is released. It just adds a sense of realism to the film that makes it more applicable to everyday life so that it doesn't feel like a sci-fi.

That's my 2 cents anyways.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:52 PM

NDRAGE85


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.



not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:56 PM

MOHRSTOUTBEARD


The fact that you did not enjoy Serenity is fair enough. It is your opinion, and you are clearly welcome to it. However, though I don't doubt your feelings or your right to have them, I don't necessarily buy your reasoning for them. . .

Quote:

The strength of Firefly was that it was a Western dressed as Sci-Fi.


That's hardly the only reason Firefly succeeds as a work of art.

Quote:

[Wash] gets killed off in an abrupt and entirely inappropriate fashion for such a major character.


Well, sometimes people get killed in abrupt and entirely inappropriate ways in real life.

Quote:

I mean, Simon suddenly getting all secret operative?? And getting into fist fights with the captain? In the series he's this genteel geek who doesn't even fight back when he's hit, now in the movie he's setting off complicated grenades and getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought? And Enora setting a flash grenade? She can barely hold a gun!


People change. Tensions between Simon and Mal have obviously been raised in the interim between series and film, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that Simon would start standing up for himself more. As for him "setting off complicated grenades," it looked like all he had to do to trigger the 'bouncing betty' was to slam his baton on the floor. Not exactly rocket science.

Regarding "getting airlifted out of secure military facilities without even a second thought," I direct you to the Operative's quote about Simon: "Madness, no. Something a good deal more dangerous. Have you looked at this scan carefully? At his face? It's love, in point of fact." We saw throughout the series that Simon was willing to do anything for River, including infiltrating a Core world hospital despite the possibility of capture. (Don't know how bright he is, top three percent, but he ain't weak and that's not nothing.)

And I'm sorry to hear that you think lighting a simple fuse is beyond Inara's capabilities.

PS: And in the time it took me to write my response, there were already eight replies. Shucks.

------------------
"Remember, there's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over."

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 6:57 PM

ADLAI


Quote:

Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.



not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.



It's true that it is unrealistic to expect the movie to be exactly the same as the series. Things are different. At the same time... I think that it could have been better. Ever watch Babylon 5 movies? They weren't big screen affairs, but many were even better than individual episodes.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:00 PM

MUTT999


Um, no, the movie didn't suck, it rocked. And it's Inara, not Enora.



"That's the buffet table....."

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:03 PM

NDRAGE85


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
Quote:

Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.



not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.



It's true that it is unrealistic to expect the movie to be exactly the same as the series. Things are different. At the same time... I think that it could have been better. Ever watch Babylon 5 movies? They weren't big screen affairs, but many were even better than individual episodes.



that is the hard thing though, Serenity was a big-screen affair, so it had to play by certain rules. i think if it was something like a made for TV movie, or straight to DVD movie, it could have kept some of those elements that were lost. The Firefly 'verse, while not overly complicated, it would have been too difficult to fully explain to a new audience in the span of 2 hours. it probably would have really come off as a half-assed explanation and would have left quite a few people confused about the fusion fo the western elements. as fans, we would have already been familiar with it. enough people were already scared off when finding out it was about a series. that means establishment, and that leaves a new viewer lost. like Joss said, "Serenity is not Firefly." A direct to DVD movie probably would have been able to hold the same feel because it is made for a core audience. a wide-release movie has different standards. for some that is good, for some it is bad. and for Serenity, some things had to be changed unfortunately.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:13 PM

JAYSONAYCH


Quote:

Originally posted by ndrage85:
Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
What he's willing to do and what he's able to do are two very different things. Simon doesn't have secret operative ability. In Safe he fights only when his back is very far to the wall, and then only barely, and with fists. From his geeky composure, a more realistic view would be him hiring men to rescue her, as was implied in the series.

a few more things:

the creative asides are gone, the little swirls of conversation that left me charmed. All gone. I sense writers block and being forced to adhere to an outline set by studio execs. As a matter of fact, I smell heavy-handed Hollywood creative tampering. Joss Whedon is a very smart writer, and that's the only explanation.



not everything could be kept the same. like Joss said, he couldn't make the movie just for the fans. having to explain Simon hiring people so smuggle River out would have taken more time. it also wouldn't have made a good connection. one of the main things that intro showed was the lengths that Simon would go to to rescue his sister. not just what was shown, but what was also discussed by the scientist and the operative. it was a necessary shortcut to take, because the movie had to have a universal appeal. to make a movie strictly for the fans would have alienated too many people. like i said, i understand your complaints, but i also understand what had to be changed for the movie. i for one enjoyed the movie. i loved it. but at the same time, i love the series more, but the two really can't be compared. there is only so much you can do in a 2 hour movie. each medium has its downsides.



Regarding Simon, it wouldn't be compelling if the characters didn't change a bit. What makes some series get stale is when the characters become static and predictable, and Firefly has been known for having well-written dynamic characters, so I'd be upset to see that some of the characters didn't grow a bit throughout the series. Simon didn't stand up too much for himself in the series, but you could see the fire there, and he did what he could within reason. He definitely could have been more assertive if he wanted to, but in the series, he's new to the outer worlds, new to the ship, and trying to find his way. He's not stupid...he fell into a pretty good situation and had to try to fit in and make nice with the Captain. But to say he didn't have the capability...well, he gave up everything he had to save his sister and put himself into very dangerous situations, so it's not like he was a complete milquetoast...just that compared to how the crew of Serenity were living life, he had a lot to learn about the culture shock and couldn't make too many waves and jeopardize his situation. However, in the 7-8 months that elapsed between the series and the movie, given all the tension flowing in that time, it's not at all unreasonable that, after being comfortable with his new life and getting sick of some of the things going on, that he'd stand up to Malcolm, especially in matters involving his sister. I think it's perfectly natural for things to have evolved to that point in that time.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:18 PM

NEVERED


if you listen to the DVD commentary, you also learn that the presence of simon and river on serenity means that they've had to stay away from the central planets, declining jobs that would put them in alliance spotlight.

mal is touchier and angrier in the movie than he is in the series because he's making a lot less than he would if the Tams weren't on board, and they're just barely scraping by.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:18 PM

ADLAI


that is true. And I would be fine with that except that the scene where Simon is playing secret operative is a flashback scene, not a present scene. All it would have taken to keep it true in spirit would have been a short shot showing his hesitation, his overcoming his meek nature. I have the feeling that the whole project was also very rushed.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:20 PM

ADLAI


Quote:

Originally posted by nevered:
if you listen to the DVD commentary, you also learn that the presence of simon and river on serenity means that they've had to stay away from the central planets, declining jobs that would put them in alliance spotlight.

mal is touchier and angrier in the movie than he is in the series because he's making a lot less than he would is the Tams weren't on board.



Except that he doesn't show anger at all during the duration of the series. This sudden anger is new and forced (perhaps also a result of Fillion playing a villain in Angel during the interim period?)

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:23 PM

NDRAGE85


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
that is true. And I would be fine with that except that the scene where Simon is playing secret operative is a flashback scene, not a present scene. All it would have taken to keep it true in spirit would have been a short shot showing his hesitation, his overcoming his meek nature. I have the feeling that the whole project was also very rushed.



yeah, i think you're sort of right there. they could have showed him being a little nervous and hesitant in the rescue. but on the other side, he had to be in character for the rescue. he was a high-ranking alliance official. he couldn't show any signs of nerviousness or weakness, it would have been a give away. i did like his big flinch when they shoot a laser at the glass when they're escaping on the platform though.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:35 PM

FIREFLYPASSENGER


I am guessing you only saw Serenity once.

It really takes a second look to see the beauty in Serenity. Serenity is not Firefly, even Joss says that. But Serenity is definitely worth another look. The first time it goes by so fast. The second time you can see a lot more happening.

Joss is all about the layers.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:35 PM

FIREFLYPASSENGER


Ooooooh yay. I haven't been here in a long time. I love this edit function.

May Serenity Keep Flying.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 7:40 PM

DRAVAS


The gloves have come on everyone is rushing to the defense. One person can look at the Mona Lisa and say the love it while another person can look at it and say its a bunch of crap.

NOTE: Point of view no realivance that I like or do not like the Mona Lisa and should be used as a referance and example.

so if you are a bit shady some of the aspects of why things changed lets go into them.

We never seen the core worlds just tiny glimpsys of the core...The hospitol job, and the antique laser gun job. There may be more but they do not come to mind right now.

As for working complicated garande let me introduce you to the united states claymore which has written on it "point toward enemy". All weapons have thier instruction manuals and are made to be used by the simplist soilder, which around 18-23 with an average IQ of Janye. So is it beyond Simon and Inra to work anytype of weapon.

As for the punch and fighting... WOW one punch ... thats all I seen him do though out the movie. Simon supresses his emotions when you do that a long time you snap and when you snap you get violent and being a geeky guy Simon's violence is one punch.

Planing ops is not beyond Simon being a doctor in the core worlds and using all his money, playing pretend and paying for the stun garnade and a ship to risk to transport them out is not beyond his capacity.

No cowboys and guns...Strange beginning then... anyways the fact that cowboysim is not a major part is because we are dealing more with the core worlds. Just think of this movie as a ep in a core world.

Mal the darker mal. He lost inra, he lost the sheapered and his guidance. Kinda why he was on edge in the begining of the movie. Mal is also a man of war you only see him go dark after New Heaven is attacked. Before that he tells us that when he goes to war you will know. He was going to war after the attack and you see he was durning the war the darker version, the one that lost all but one in his platoon in the battle of Serenity.

As for wash meeting his maker trust me it hurt as for a inapporate death define an approate death to me.

I enjoyed the movie not everyone is going to like it, but let it be and lets not argue the point.

Remember

Some People Juggle Geese


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

Friday, January 6, 2006 8:08 PM

NOSADSEVEN


Adlai, I'm curious to know how long ago you saw the movie, and how many times. I definately had a period of adjustment to get used to it. I saw an advanced screening back in June, and when the US poster was released I remember people who hadn't seen the movie yet complaining that the poster didn't reflect Firefly's warmth. I remember thinking, "Well, I really couldn't describe Serenity as warm." So I get that "cold" feeling you mention.

That being said, I have really grown to love and appreciate the movie. The change in tone and pace from Firefly was so jarring to me at first, that I felt like it was missing it's soul. But after (months later) having the chance to see it again (and again, and again...), I noticed many of those little moments and "swirls" that I had missed the first time.

Anyway, the changes in tone are due to differing nature (and demands) of movies vs. tv shows. It was the constraints of telling a 2 season story arc with nine distinct characters in 2 hours to fans and newbies alike to blame, not heavy-handed execs. (Unless you're referring to the FOX execs that killed Firefly in the first place.)

Anyway, if you get a chance to see it more, and digest it more, you may gain a different perpective of it. If you already have seen it multiple times over the course of months, and still have problems, well, then we can debate!

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ain't. We. Just.

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 8:29 PM

SNEAKER98


Umm...

They essentially robbed a BANK in the opening. I can't really think of anything more western... except perhaps the quickdraw standoff between Mal and The Operative.

I suggest, the next time you watch Firefly, you start noticing the difference between the Core and the Outer worlds. Pay close attention to Ariel; it's Western element is very, very sparse because they're in "civilized space".

As for Wash's death, well that was the moment Joss went "Look, this isn't Star Trek.". And also the moment I went "Thank you!"

"I do the job... and then I get paid. Go run your little world."
-Malcolm Reynolds

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 9:06 PM

ITSBROKEN


I see that there is no ranting on this post yet which is very good considering the title seems like it is inviting flamers. However i do suggest putting SPOILER across the top cause as it was said, some people havent seen the movie yet. just to be curtious

-----
***someone should make a MMORPG based on the 'verse!***

Geeze i want Firefly to come back!

-----

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

Friday, January 6, 2006 9:21 PM

WASTEGATE13


Wouldn't it be weird if they pulled a Macross and Serenity was actually a movie in the FireFly verse? I don't know how many of you are familiar with Anime but Shoji Kawamori did this with his series and the later film. He explained it as being "a theatrical retelling of the events of Macross". Perhaps Serenity is a "theatrical retelling" of a period in the life of our BDH's, a little dramatized and exaggerated to make it more appealing to a mainstream audience. Just something to think about.

"Jayne's a girl's name."

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:02 AM

ANDRE83


Well, personally i think the fact that you even mention Wash just makes your whole argument flawed. Personally i think you are just mad because he died.

Like so many was - which is stupid imo. His death had a great impact - so it served its purpose.

Go play with your rainstick.

Jayne: All those years of preacher training, getting knocked out by one bounty hunter
Book: Oh, dont get me wrong. I gave him a hell of a fight
Jayne: Epic i'm guessing

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:37 AM

LOCRAY


I have something to say about Simon and about the killing of Wash leading to less jokes and fun...

If you have not noticed, Simon is not only the little geek he seems to be. When he is comfortable he is actually quite funny. You notice him becoming more and more comfortable as the series move on, and him also delivering more jokes. The contrast is especially clear in Pilot, where he is extremely "uncomfortable" (didn't come up with a better word) during the entire episode. But then, when he's going to fix Kaylie (how the hell did you spell that again?) he even stands up to Mal, because he is in his "homefield", in a nursery. Where he feels at home, and in there he feels comfortable.

The ship feels more and more home for him during the show and he becomes less and less geeky. So he hits the captain. So he delivers some more jokes. So him, plus a possible new character (to become the pilot of Serenity?) could way up for the loss of Wash when it comes to jokes.

Other than that, the movie was definetly not as good as the series. It was too... too... too Hollywood, everything packed together on what felt like minimum time and maximum action and happenings. Though I still loved the movie, it just didn't live up to the series.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:49 AM

CAPTKAR


One thing everybody has to understand is that the movie was made that way on purpose. The characters were supposed to be darker because they were pushed to the raggedy edge, not alot of jobs going to 'em, Books gone so they don't really have that same decision making ability they had when he was on the ship, and Inara is gone so Kaylee (the happiness and warmth of the crew) doesnt have that "friend-to-go-to".

Also the movie was supposed to be a faster paced more SciFi oriented movie, because Joss hoped that the people going to the movies and seeing Serenity would be more people than just the loyal Browncoats. Making the movie faster/more action-packed would hopefully draw more people to the FF/Serenity verse, thus sperring on more support for another movie or hopefully another series (not Firefly because as Joss said it was over) but maybe a Serenity series.

Finally the movie is over and done with (meaning its already been made and showed) so theres no need to start some arguments about whether or not you liked it much less throwing around insults or God-Forbid trollage, just state your peace and go on about your eerie ass day.

Thanks for listening to my hopefully not ill-fated attempts at making peace and my opinion on the movie

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:03 AM

CAUSAL


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
Except that he doesn't show anger at all during the duration of the series. This sudden anger is new and forced (perhaps also a result of Fillion playing a villain in Angel during the interim period?)



Now I'm starting to wonder if you've even seen the series. Mal gets mad:

Serenity Parts 1 & 2
He decks Simon in the cargo bay.
He punches Simon for suggesting that he should be working for the Alliance.
He shoots Patience's horse, sticks a gun in her face, and takes the purse ("I do the job, then I get paid").

The Train Job
Kicking Crow into the engine? Hello?

Bushwhacked
Clearly upset when Commander Harken accuses him of killing the settlers, not believing that Reavers killed them.

Shindig
Mal coldcocks Atherton Wing for implying that Inara is a whore. Oh, and point of interest, stabs him twice after winning the duel.

Our Mrs. Reynolds
Whacks Saffron in the side of the head with the gun.

Out of Gas
He's pretty clearly upset when talking to Captain of the Walden (who shot him in the gut), after he's found the gun and turned the tables on the other crew.

Ariel
Seems a mite angry at Jayne, who turned on his crew.

War Stories
When he's beating up Niska he seems pretty pissed.

Trash
After Monty's ship leaves, the whole exchange with Saffor/Bridgit makes it pretty clear that he's been harboring some anger toward her ever since she hijiacked his ship and tried to kill them all.

Heart of Gold
After Burgess has shot Nandi, Mal chases and catches up with him. Beats him up, then lets Petaline shoot him in cold blood.

Is that enough to demonstrate that Mal has always had some anger to him?


________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:21 AM

CAPTKAR


Going along with the whole anger-issue in Serenity. It would make Mal seem in-human and more or less robotic if he didnt get angry when:

1) he gets punched in the face after they all come back safe from a near death experience with Reavers

2) He gets the percent upgrade for the middle-man so he loses money

3) Seemingly his crew begins to turn on him when he says Simon is gone and he dont care

4) Book gets killed be the Operative

5) He finds out the Alliance which he hates so mush created Reavers by trying to force people to be more peaceful just like they did with the war

6) and finally he gets stabbed with a sword. I think that would piss anybody off dont you.

If anybody could go through all that and not show one hint of emotion they wouldnt be human. Or they would be a Sociopath which i dont think Mal is.

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:39 AM

PDCHARLES

What happened? He see your face?


OK.. Serenity <> Sucky Movie..

Are u out of your mind? (still a non-flaming opinion respecter) The movie took some very obvious turns that would have inevitably played out in the series and the “extra” dialog for non-firefly fans was short and sweet. There was not enough time to get ALL western on ya. It would not have made sense to have Miranda be a poor outer moon or the have reavers chillin’ in a saloon playin’ Faro.

Hey if we didn’t have Simon getting all, as u say, “secret operative”, we would have no River. He gave us an executive summary of an explanation in the series of how he got her out. This doesn’t seem so out of the norm. Having the real alliance operative in the movie explain the “look of love” on his face really defines Simon I think.

And thanx Casual and Captkar
Mal = Anger… (Not defining him as one-dimensional) a character trait I would have expected in the movie.


U gonna be smart here Riva!?!

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:43 AM

CAPTKAR


I love it when im not the only "voice-of-reason" hehe

-When you can't run you crawl, and when you can't crawl you find someone to carry you-

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 8:16 AM

ADLAI


You know, the extras did make me laugh... the outtakes were hillarious too. The one moment when Nathan Fillion is ordering the crew to adorn the ship with bodies... he goes to Kaylee and is like, "I want the baby Jesus on the top" or something like that with a straight face, and she just starts cracking up.

The cast realized how forced and silly the script was also.

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:07 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Something here is pissing me off, and it isn’t that someone said the movie sucked (though that irks too.)

Simon in the series was a guy who would jump off a catwalk, or get into a fistfight with a well trained armed bounty hunter after he (Simon) had already been shot. He was the sort of guy who was willing to die by fire or risk Kaylee’s life for River.

We’ve always known he would punch Mal if the occasion warranted because he has never been afraid to die (something we have known from the first episode) and Mal isn’t the type to do anything worse than kill him.

If I had to pick something as out of character it would be that he didn't kill the doctors. Given how far he is willing to go and what they did to River it would only make sense to kill them. However the series clearly showed that he was not a killer at that point, while he might kill for River he had not done it yet.

Of course that really shows how not-badass Simon was in the intro, he went into a place and made sure that he wasn't carrying a single lethal weapon. Which is really exactly what we expect from the Simon of the series, he'll jump off a catwalk knowing full well that such a fall could easily kill or cripple him, but he'll hesitate to pull the trigger. Truely this is the kind of guy who would walk into a facility where they would kill him if they found him out, but not use lethal force while there.

If you missed the point, the thing that at first seems out of character to me is totally in character, and I can not think of anything else that even seems out of character for him.

Quote:

Originally posted by Lookatthatbird:
And since when is Mal so angry?


Watch the episode Serenity again. Mal was like that in the beginning of the series.

Of course the entire movie was a happy cheery version of Mal when compared to the end of Ariel.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:20 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Oh, a little "by the way" here.

Nathan Fillion never appeared on Angel. You're thinking of Buffy which was a very different show. (Buffy's goal was to kill demons; Angel's was to save the innocent. They used the same method, but the distinction created very different dynamics.)

While no one here will ever demand you watch either show (being a Firefly fan does not require it) it would be nice if you would make sure you speak the truth, little falsehoods make you seem troll-like because they imply that you do not care about what you are saying.

I’m not calling you a troll, I do not believe you to be one, but I think it will help others continue to recognize that you are not one if you try to be more accurate. This is a sensitive issue and it helps to be precise.

If an angry person were to read that you said Nathan was on Angel they might jump to the conclusion that you had no idea what you were talking about and were just saying everything based on shoddy second-hand information. Things like that have happened before.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 9:21 AM

WASTEGATE13


So no one likes my Macross theory?

"Jayne's a girl's name."

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 10:34 AM

CENTURYHOUSE


I had never seen the Firefly series when I saw the movie "Serenity".

The movie was good enough to make me go out and buy the Firefly DVD set AND the Serenity movie DVD.

That said, I do think the series was warmer and more nuanced but that's to be expected.

Check out my songs:
http://www.thelightningwaltz.com

http://www.myspace.com/crash_sun

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:04 AM

DRAVAS


In the words of Wash

Some People Juggle Geese

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 11:06 AM

OMELET


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.



If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 12:39 PM

J6NGO1977


Quote:

Originally posted by Omelet:
Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.



If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!



Yep I agree. You hit the nail on the head. Serenity aint Firefly. As I said before If I was stranded on a desert island with a DVD player (it was in a water tight case. don't argue .lol) and I had a choice between Serenity and 1 episode of Firefly. Give me 'Out of Gas' every time

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 1:11 PM

OMELET


Quote:

Originally posted by j6ngo1977:
Quote:

Originally posted by Omelet:
Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:

Btw, I saw the movie last night on dvd for the first time. Not to flog a dead horse, but if the movie had had more of the Firefly humor, it would have done much better.



If you read my earlier post, you would learn that Serenity had to be a darker film because we are dealing with River's past. Not only that, but Mal is also becoming quite darker than the Firefly Mal. The film had to be darker because the Alliance is a dark place filled with these experiments to further their utopian society and keep themselves safe, as demonstrated by the program that River was in, in Serenity. The Blue Sun group, if you noticed their sign on Miranda, was part of that group that made the Reavers who they are. Not only that, but they made River who she is; a crazy psychic killing machine. This movie ain't about sunshine and lolipops. What was eating River's sanity up was a very dark secret kept by the heads of the Alliance. During Firefly, it was okay to have River be considered the crazy girl, because we didn't know what was exactly done to her and it was actually funny to her. Now, her sanity is leaving her more rapidly and leading the crew to the truth. There were some funny moments in the film, the Oh God, Oh God we're all gonna die line by Wash was funny, but they were there to keep the film from becoming too dark and depressing, which is like Joss because he loves to add humor to dangerous situations. Remember one thing next time you watch this movie, it isn't Firefly.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!



Yep I agree. You hit the nail on the head. Serenity aint Firefly. As I said before If I was stranded on a desert island with a DVD player (it was in a water tight case. don't argue .lol) and I had a choice between Serenity and 1 episode of Firefly. Give me 'Out of Gas' every time



Thank you. I agree completely, except I would choose Objects in Space for the sheer fact that Simon looks fantastic without his shirt on.

Jayne: Are you saying River's a witch?
Wash: Yes, Jayne, she's a witch. She's had congress with the Beast.
Jayne: She's in Congress?
Wash: How did your brain even learn human speech? I'm just so curious!

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 1:51 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by adlai:
The quirkyness of the series is entirely absent in the movie.

"You want to run this ship?!"
What was the answer to Mal's question? And what did he reply to that with?
Non-sequeter, your facts are un-co-ord-ina-ted.
It WAS quirky, and it WAS western-y (and BTW, IT WAS GREAT).
Did you also not like Objects In Space because Mal got beat up and knocked out- it never happened before that!
Did you dislike Ariel for it's lack of horses?

You know, I'm gonna go all purist myself and say that only the pilot is real 'Firefly', everything else is an abberation or perversion of the original idea (ie, no change or growth allowed).

Really, what did you want, a movie with no tension or climax? A long re-make of Train Job but with an extended campfire scene?

(come to think of it, I do like campfire scenes)Chrisisall

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:08 PM

CHRISTHECYNIC


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
You know, I'm gonna go all purist myself and say that only the pilot is real 'Firefly', everything else is an abberation or perversion of the original idea (ie, no change or growth allowed).


There is actually some truth to that. The episodes of series, after Serenity, and the movie were all significantly lighter than the original vision. I'd point you to Inara's intended encounter with the Reavers if I remembered the link.

Clearly the movie was far too much of a happy-cheery sugar-coated affair to be worthy of the Firefly crew and fans.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 4:53 PM

ADLAI


I actually thought that Objects in Space was probably the strongest episode (well, maybe aside from the pilot).

Whedon's strength is his unconventional writing, like how he breaks conventional structure (though I believe Tim Minear wrote Objects in Space... ) anyways, I suspect that Whedon decided to "play it safe" in writing Serenity. I can understand why, but I'm still disappointed.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:02 PM

GEDEON


Wow, with all these people responding, I just hope somebody noticed the kid has a point. We all love the 'verse so much, expectations were perhaps too high. Then again, some people don't watch the news because they don't want to know...

Gedeon

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 5:52 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by christhecynic:


Clearly the movie was far too much of a happy-cheery sugar-coated affair to be worthy of the Firefly crew and fans.

That scene in Serenity where all those cuddly space-bunnies made friends with the Alliance soldiers and got them to stop chasing Mal out of sheer goodness of the soul killed it for me.

It's too dark.
It's too light.
Sheesh, it ain't easy bein' Joss, I guess.

Chrisisall!

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 6:29 PM

ADLAI


I'm watching it a second time. I don't mind the changes so much the 2nd time around... but I have to say that it still pales in comparison to the series.

A few more things. Why is Jayne suddenly so smart? He has actuall comebacks to the captain like "when have your plans ever gone right?"

And since when did they get a nifty little hovercraft? especially if they're running out of money. Firefly of old was charming because it was spaceships corralling cattle, where after they landed they rode horses.

also, quick plothole: if Reavers are so hyper aggressive, how do they get so organized in the first place that they don't kill each other?

Although, I have been too hard on the movie. It is vastly superior to the new Star Wars movies, though I've never seen Star Trek movies. It is better than the Farscape miniseries. Much, much better than the miniseries.

if this helps, The New Republic has a glowing review of Serenity (site's down right now, just do a search) though I think that the critic was a Firefly virgin.

I still don't like the new direction of the series though. When it becomes one of those "fate of the galaxy" type shows, it automatically becomes more Sci-fi. Again, Firefly was a Western with some Sci-Fi dressings. Whedon himself criticized sci-fi (in one of the Firefly DVD extras) as "stand back and look"

In one of the extras, he says that the inspiration for Firefly was a Civil War book.

one more thing. Action without emotional context is just dance. I (and most peopl) find watching dance extremely boring.

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 6:39 PM

ADLAI


one more thing. look at this

http://www.slate.com/id/2127162/

and then this

http://imdb.com/name/nm0923736/

He's a much better TV writer than a movie writer. The rule is Film is the realm of the director and TV the realm of the writer, and reality the realm of the casting director.

His movie credits include Alien 4 and Titan AE. Both space sci-fi epics dealing with spaceships and stuff... Serenity shows a more sci-fi turn, unfortunately. If a new series were announced I'd still probably tune in... Firefly truly is dead though

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

Saturday, January 7, 2006 7:03 PM

NISKAANDEBERT


The movie took off from where the series ended. Joss obviously wanted to create closure. The major cliffhange left by the series was"what is the deal with River?" Myself--I loved seeing River get to kick some serious ass. As far as killing off wash and Book--JW knew it was a feature film--and his last chance--there would be no sequel. He had to make it interesting for people who'd never seen the series--like me.

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

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL