Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Sci-Fi Media Movies

Serenity Opens Today 488

Posted by Zonk from the try-to-kill-them-right-back dept.
joemite writes "As every Browncoat knows, Serenity, the motion picture based on the Firefly series opened today. For the uninitiated, Serenity is based on the short-lived Fox television show Firefly (created by Joss Whedon, [Buffy the Vampire Slayer]), which follows a group of outlaws in a unique space-western universe. While there are no aliens or temporal anomalies, the stage is set for our group of heros to out-wit and out-strategize the giant and evil Alliance. Go out and watch the movie this weekend and see why the Firefly series is an Amazon.com best seller." If you're on the fence, reviews available at SFGate, Wired, the Seattle Times, and IGN.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Serenity Opens Today More

Serenity Opens Today

Comments Filter:

  • Rotten Tomatoes (Score:4, Informative)

    by andy4322 ( 844920 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @05:53PM (#13689189)
    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/serenity/ [rottentomatoes.com]

    Currently 83% fresh!

  • Great movie with free market touches (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dada21 ( 163177 ) * <adam.dada@gmail.com> on Friday September 30, 2005 @05:53PM (#13689193) Homepage Journal
    Saw it this morning. I never go to the theater, either. Props to Marcus Theaters in Gurnee. Great sound, great visual focus. Benefit of missing Navy pay day by a day.

    Serenity has great Free Market plot lines, just as Firefly did. My "beloved" LRC has some good insight here [lewrockwell.com] andhere [lewrockwell.com].

    Even the theme song is freedom loving:
    Take my love.
      Take my land.
      Take me where I cannot stand.
      I don't care, I'm still free.
      You can't take the sky from me.
    Take me out
      to the black.
      Tell 'em I ain't comin' back.
      Burn the land and boil the sea.
      You can't take the sky from me.
    Have no place
      I can be
      Since I found Serenity.

    To bad Whedon's a socialist. Weird.

    Maybe we can change that. I'm ready to pay Joss Whedon a nice annual subscription to have him bring Firefly back (web based video, high quality codec) to an online format. Fuck ox and Cable producers. Anyone know of a way to contact him about the idea?

    FWIW the movie does feel TV-ish. I'd like to know what it was filmed on and edited on.

    • Re:Great movie with free market touches (Score:4, Informative)

      by Holi ( 250190 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:04PM (#13689303)
      Unfortunately Fox owns the first broadcast rights to the show. So Joss would have to rename/rework the show so as not to infringe on Firefly.

      • Easy!! (Score:3, Funny)

        by Unknown Poltroon ( 31628 ) *
        "Bright butt beetle"
      • Well, for what it's worth, and knowing how us geeks can be both opinionated AND polite* in expressing those opinions, here's some contact information for 20th Century Fox TV:

        askfox@foxinc.com
        10201 West Pico Blvd.
        Los Angeles, CA 90035
        Phone: 310-369-3553
        Fax: 310-369-8471

        *e.g.: My message to them upon finishing watching Firefly for the 1st time: "I fucking hate you guys SO MUCH. Signed, someone who just discovered firefly." This is only because I couldn't figure out how to say "Baboon's ass" in Chinese.

    • Re:Great movie with free market touches (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      To bad Whedon's a socialist. Weird.

      Too bad you don't know what that means.

    • Re:Great movie with free market touches (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      To bad Whedon's a socialist. Weird.

      I have it on good authority that in addition to not being a libertarian, Whedon is also not a teenage girl or vampire.
    • Even the theme song is freedom loving:

      To bad Whedon's a socialist. Weird.

      well i dont know if thats true (never heard it before), but i believe the ideal socialist world would involve a non corrupt centralized authority (super computer or something). In this world, all basic needs are provided by the world govt. Everyone is free to do what they want with their lives without worrying about starving to death or being overcome by sickness or greed. The idea is that there are no rich/poor classes but just one cl
      • Actually, libertarianism is nearly opposite socialism. Libertarianism holds that you own yourself and your labor. Socialism holds that you and your labor belong to the state. How are "all basic needs are provided by the world govt"?
    • is Whedon a 'socialist' or is he just not die hard free market (i.e. advocates a government with social programs and regulation)? Is he just labeling himself a socialist because it seems trendy, or are you just branding him as such because 'socialist' is a convenient slur to pigeonhole people who have stated some level of progressive beliefs.

      imo, anyone who capitalizes free market (get it? haha bad pun) and swings about the label of 'socialist' and assumes that this is anything less than an ambiguous emo
    • FWIW the movie does feel TV-ish. I'd like to know what it was filmed on and edited on.
      35mm, edited on an Avid system, I think.

  • Yay! (Score:2)

    by Ikn ( 712788 )
    I never got to see the series, but I've heard great things about it, so I'm definitely checking it out tonight with the little lady. I've heard good things from those that got to see the advance screenings, so I'm hoping it won't be terrible (isn't it bad when that's how our expectations for movies come out these days?).

  • For the uninitiated (Score:5, Funny)

    by stefanlasiewski ( 63134 ) * <(moc.ocnafets) (ta) (todhsals)> on Friday September 30, 2005 @05:56PM (#13689229) Homepage Journal
    For the uninitiated, Serenity is based on the short-lived Fox television show Firefly

    If you're that uninitiated, you'll need to know this-- Slashdot is a "Web Site" where we talk about geeky things.

    Surely, if anyone on Slashdot hasn't heard of Serenity, it would cause a quantum singularity and we would all get sucked into a blackhole.

    Not to get all Treky or anything.

    • Re:For the uninitiated (Score:2, Informative)

      by hanabal ( 717731 )
      you do realise that for most of the world, firefly has never appeared on TV. And so, at least for me, I don't pay attention to topics about a TV show im not likely to get to see for a long time.
      • We got Firefly here in New Zealand earlier this year, and I finally got to see what all you American Slashdotters were raving about. I enjoyed it, pity it was on so late at night.

        Now I wonder how long it will take the movie to get here. No spoilers please!!
    • Not to get all Treky or anything.

      Huh? What is this "Trek" you speak of?
    • Boy, is your world going to be upset...

      I don't own a television, and I have never had a need to own one. I have never heard of Firefly, and a lot of television shows you all take for granted, I might (if I'm lucky) be able to just recognize the names.

      It's also very rare that I watch movies. *grin* The MPAA can't touch me, or my wallet. ;)

      Don't forget, some of us are so hooked on these odd beige boxes that those picture boxes might as well be shelves.
  • I'll be heading out to see serenity in about an hour. I have never seen firefly, despite trying for the past three weeks (curse my stupid computer for not recording). What do I need to know in order to better understand and enjoy the movie (other than what is in the trailer).

  • Firefly (Score:4, Interesting)

    by LiquidCoooled ( 634315 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @05:59PM (#13689259) Homepage Journal
    I heard all along that it was another sci-fi show that was from the creator of Buffy.
    I left it alone because "another hit show from the writer of XYZ" is usually a steaming pile of bumpoo. This kind of hype is like a one hit wonder from the music charts trying to get his 2nd song sold.

    I don't care who wrote it, I wanna know how good it is.

    I'm currently half way through the dvd episodes and I'm hooked.
    Why the hell didn't anyone tell me it was this good on its own merits?

    Hope the movie is as good.

    ps, even after my rant, how exactly do you hype a series about a rag tag group of cowboys flying around in a spaceship getting into scrapes? I've never been able to describe it to my friends properly.

    • Re:Firefly (Score:3, Funny)

      by PhotoBoy ( 684898 )
      "how exactly do you hype a series about a rag tag group of cowboys flying around in a spaceship getting into scrapes?"

      I've never been able to come up with anything short or snappy to describe it either. The best I've been able to manage is "it's a bit like Han Solo getting his own TV show", but I'm not sure if that description does more harm than good when people realise Jewel Staite looks nothing like Chewbacca.

    • Re:Firefly (Score:2, Informative)

      by XFilesFMDS1013 ( 830724 )
      I don't know, "Fucking awesome" has always worked for me. I know at least one friend who's going to see it because of the way it was previewed, what with the crazy hanging from the ceiling girl and all. But I have high hopes that once he sees the movie, he'll want to see the show. I think the Amazon review has a two lines that I'll always remember, "Space hooker", that, if nothing else, should get people to want to see it.

    • Re:Firefly (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jason ward ( 581483 )
      Now I went into this more excited about this movie than any other movie I've ever been to. My expectations were to be given the stars on a platter. While the movie didn't quite live up to that, it was still a damn good movie. It defiantly ranks as one of my favorites.

      The back story for several key mysteries in the series were explored and laid open, which was nice I guess. I have to say that the best thing for Firefly was to be canceled when it did. That's what drove the Fans, and myself, into a frenzy. The

  • This year in the movies (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ZachPruckowski ( 918562 ) <zachary.pruckowski@gmail.com> on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:05PM (#13689314)
    It seems to me that this year has been a re-defining year in the movies. I think that in 5 years, we'll be able to point to this year as the year things changed.

    The reason I say this is that what this summer proved is that movies now need more than pretty scenery and special effects to turn a profit in the box office. "Batman" had a deep story, and "War of the Worlds" was a remake of a classic. "Wedding Crashers" was hilarious. The movies that stunk, like "Stealth" and "The Island", didn't have anything more than special effects and good looking girls.

    But "Cry_Wolf", a movie without any special effects, made it's money back 5-fold. It is possible that the same sort of thing will happen with Serenity. So if it does well, that may get us not only sequels, but movies with more plot and story and atmosphere, which would be great for us, as more sophisticated movie watchers.
    • I consider myself a reasonably discriminating movie enthusiast, and I abhorred the "War of the Worlds" remake and enjoyed "The Island" (also a remake, btw). Of course, I was expecting "War of the Worlds" to be good and "The Island" to be bad, from their respective previews. Cry_Wolf looked so bad I'm basing a parody submission for a trailer contest on it.

      But to get back on-topic, I'm totally looking forward to Serenity (loved the series on DVD, not on Fox), but I have to admit the trailers make it loo
    • > we'll be able to point to this year as the year things changed

      Yeah, I said the same thing the year both Clerks and Waterworld came out.

      sigh...
  • Mal: Well, look at this! Appears we got here just in the nick of time. What does that make us?

    Zoe: Big damn heroes, sir. :)

    • Jayne: You know what the chain of command is? It's the chain I go get and beat you with 'til you understand who's in ruttin' command here.

      and

      Mal: So did I call you back?
      Wash: No, Mal, you didn't...
      Zoe: I take full responsibility, sir.
      Simon: Her decision probably saved your life.
      Zoe: Won't happen again, sir.

  • I saw the 12:01am showing at the Sony Metreon last night. I couldn't wait until today.

    No spoilers: It was fantastic!

    -Chris
  • Torrent link anyone?

    *ducks*

    Good bye, karma. I barely knew you.

  • That is all.
  • "Serenity is so like TV that it ought to come with a clicker so we can switch over to the next movie at the multiplex."
    -- Kyle Smith, NEW YORK POST

  • "Serenity" Review from Salon.com (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SpryGuy ( 206254 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:18PM (#13689433)
    Joss Whedon's feature-film debut, the science-fiction western "Serenity," is beautifully made, written with more wit and intelligence than we get from most contemporary movies of any genre, and features an ensemble of actors whose rhythms are almost supernaturally in tune. There's only one problem with "Serenity": It's not "Firefly," the TV show that first gave these characters, and this story, life in autumn 2002 on the Fox network.

    Both "Firefly" (which is available on DVD) and this new movie incarnation of it detail the adventures and tribulations of a loner-rebel named Malcolm Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) and the ragtag crew of his space vessel, Serenity. Their story unfolds in a future world -- the 26th century, to be exact -- in which humans have left an uninhabitable earth to populate a new-old, way-out-there solar system. More Sam Peckinpah than "Star Trek," this isn't a shiny, sleek vision of the future: For one thing, the various planets in this new world have been recently divided by a brutal civil war, and the winning side -- the Alliance -- is now trying to gather all the outlying hoi polloi planets under its rule. Many of these planets are hardscrabble frontiers whose citizens still ride horses, use old-time firearms, and even, occasionally, wear sunbonnets. The idea isn't just that civilization as we know it has largely disappeared, but that people have been so buffeted by hardship that they've had to start practically from scratch.

    The "Firefly" episodes burn slowly at first, but their emotional heat intensifies as you learn to live, and breathe, with the show's characters. That's an ancient narrative strategy, and one that Whedon had clearly mastered with his earlier series, the magnificent "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and its less resonant but still deeply enjoyable spinoff, "Angel." But apparently, this newfangled mode of storytelling intimidated Fox executives. They pulled the plug on "Firefly" after airing only 10 of the 14 episodes Whedon and his cast had completed -- and broadcasting them out of sequence. "Firefly" was seen by almost no one when it aired, partly because even those who desperately wanted to watch it -- namely, the many fans Whedon had earned with his previous series -- couldn't even find it when they turned on their TVs at the appointed time: The episodes were shown in fits and starts, several of them having been preempted by the World Series.

    That's probably the worst thing you could do to a Whedon show, considering that he builds his narratives with the dramatic precision of 19th century novels. They don't always grab you with the first episode -- they're not made that way. Whedon prefers to reel us in gently, first setting the scene and then, week by week, drawing us into a web of complex character relationships that become a kind of home for us. Fans of Whedon's shows are the modern-day equivalents of those readers who so long ago got hooked on Dickens, people who would wait on American docks for the next installments of his newspaper serials to arrive on these Godforsaken shores. (Dickens biographer Edgar Johnson recounts how "waiting crowds at a New York pier shouted to an incoming vessel, 'Is Little Nell dead?'")

    That's how it should have worked with "Firefly." The show finally did find its audience when it was released on DVD in late 2003, and Whedon, who had never given up on the show and its extraordinarily well-matched cast, sought ways to spin its posthumous success into another project. And almost against all odds, a major movie studio, Universal, put its money (perhaps not a whole lot, but enough) on a show that had earned lots of love but not a whole lot of cash.

    "Serenity" -- which Whedon wrote as well as directed -- is both a primer on "Firefly" and an extension of it, a picture carefully calibrated to satisfy fans without leaving newcomers stranded. Whedon sets up the back story neatly at the beginning, introducing all of his characters in a few fleet scenes. Their dialogue comes off as casual, but it's really tightly scripted, a compr
  • I'll be brief about the movie, it's excellent and much more so if you have watched the show.

    With that out of the way I figured I would comment on this constant Whedon people versus non-Whedon fans. If you don't like anything he has done and think he is a hack, fine. I don't really care. What troubles me is not people who dislike Whedon or don't think that this movie going experience can compare to a late 50's Goddard film. What troubles me is that it seems a lot of those who continually put down his work do
  • Next week in the UK. Lucky we had the world premiere and a few more screenings already.
  • I watched it this afternoon at the Alamo Drafthouse in Austin. Great movie. There were a couple of plot points that surprised me, like the very nasty surprise after the crash landing.

    They do a segment at the beginning to help flesh out the River/Simon Tam backstory. There's some set up to show what's happened to a few characters since the show ended, and an answer to at least one of the show's major questions.

    About the venue. The Alamo Drafthouse is a chain of theaters started in Austin. They have a fu
    • Just as an addendum about the Drafthouse. Since they're an independant theater chain, they can get away with making or appropriating their own lead in material. For Aerenity, they ran the documentary off the DVD collection about the making of the series, a music video featuring Mal and His "wife" set to "I will survive", and a video entitled "Chinese Swearing 101". They also ran the trailer for "Ice Pirates" along with the real trailers for Jarhead and a couple of others.

  • Saw it on Monday (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bobcat7677 ( 561727 )
    I caught a preview showing on monday here in Portland, OR. The crowd there very much enjoyed the show and there was a standing ovation at the end. While I did cheer with the rest of them and did enjoy the movie overall, I have to only give it 4 out of 5 stars. I won't spoil it for anyone and go into detail, but I was dissapointed with a couple things that seemed to detract from the flow of the movie so that's what knocked off a star. But there were plenty of good quotable lines, a decent plot, and quite

  • A Consolidation of Reviews (Score:3, Informative)

    by Hellboy0101 ( 680494 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:21PM (#13689470)
    To save time searching for reviews (if that's what you're looking for), here you go. http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/serenity [metacritic.com]

  • Second Time, again (Score:2, Informative)

    by Forthan Red ( 820542 )
    When it comes to TV and Movies, Joss Whedon seems to need two tries to get it right. "Buffy", the movie, sucked (no pun intended... okay, maybe it was). "Firefly", likewise seemed only half thought-out before they started the cameras running. They couldn't decide if the story spanned star systems, and FTL was possible, or it all took place in a single solar system (the different intros on the show implied different things). In the movie, they make it very clear that the entire Alliance, and the outlying wor
    • "There's no indication in the series that she had been turned into the ultimate killing machine".

      Huh ? What about that time when she killed several guards inside Niska's station with her eyes closed ?

      • Re:Second Time, again (Score:4, Informative)

        by AJWM ( 19027 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @06:50PM (#13689721) Homepage
        "There's no indication in the series that she had been turned into the ultimate killing machine".

        Huh ? What about that time when she killed several guards inside Niska's station with her eyes closed ?

        Or when she tells Jayne "I can kill you with my mind" -- and neither he nor we know if she's kidding.
    • There's no indication in the series that she had been turned into the ultimate killing machine

      Uh...so when they're busting in to save Mal from being tortured, and River whips out a gun and *while blindfolded* blows away a run of guards, that doesn't scream "ultimate killing machine"?

      So at what point is the threshold between killing machine and "ultimate" killing machine anyway? ;) Sort of like Vegeta, or *Super* Vegeta. Heck, at least we know the difference between Mario and Super Mario. He doubles in si
  • I saw a sneak preview of this Tuesday night and loved it so much I saw the 12:01am showing this morning. It lives up to repeat viewings very well.

  • Julian Sanchez, over at http://www.reason.com/ [reason.com] has an interesting article about the Camus and Sartre influence in Serenitty.

    *Warning MEGA Spoilers*

    *Warning MEGA Spoilers*

    *Warning MEGA Spoilers*

    An excerpt: (full text behind this link. [reason.com])

    In Serenity, however, the central influence appears to be not Sartre but Albert Camus. The Operative, for example, is emphatically not some mere bounty hunter, but a true believer. As he explains at one point, "I believe in something greater than myself: A better

  • Anyone know when/where its opening in trinidad????
  • This is an attempt to gather together where people are gathering to see Serenity in various cities.
    • So far there appear to be two group gatherings in Vancouver BC:
      • Metrotown 7:00PM showing.
      • Oak Ridge 9:45

      • Re:Group Gathereings: Vancouver BC (Score:4, Interesting)

        by wrecked ( 681366 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @08:01PM (#13690309)
        Just saw it at the Paramount at 600 Burrard Street.

        What is quite remarkable is that even though Serenity has been pre-screened what, 100 times? since May, you don't see cam torrents floating around. The restraint of the fan base from leaking spoilers and cams says a lot about their loyalty. Contrast that with say, the Hulk or Revenge of the Sith.

        Here's hoping for the sequels.
    • PDX Browncoats are apparently organizing a
      10:30pm showing at Century Eastport 16 (4040 SE 82nd Ave - 503-775-0000)

      They apparently also have a ""Big Damn Pre-show Dinner" at Grand Buffet 4410 SE 82nd Ave (503) 788-8000 7:30 pm - 10:00 pm."

  • Will I still enjoy Serenity if I've never seen Firefly? Please reply after you've seen the movie so I'll know if I want to see it or not.
  • I am going to see this movie tonight for one reason:

    To vote with my $$ so that Hollywood suits can see that non-Trek SciFi can be suce$$full. My real motivation for this is Babylon5: The Memory of Shadows.

    I am hoping that if Serenity can earn real money then perhaps TMoS will rise again.

    I have tried watching Firefly, I don't like the whole cowboys in space angle. The entire technology needed to travel interstellar distances, should be 'good-enough' to produce laser-pistols, not 6-shooters!

    Hauling cattle f

  • What's the deal? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Apreche ( 239272 )
    I feel like I'm the only geek in the world who doesn't like this show/movie. I watched numerous episodes including the entire pilot and was completely unimpressed. It looked to me just like every other average sci-fi show that the sci-fi channel produces. Granted, I was never a fan of this kind of sci-fi. I like Star Wars, but I hate Star Trek with a passion. Firefly/Serenty I don't really hate, there was just nothing great about it. It's "bleh" to me.

    Am I alone here? I mean seriously, how much of the likin
  • Wohoo. Now we get to duplicate that FAQ about /.ers giving money to the MPAA for a movie that takes prescidence over common slashdot opinions for bad IP laws.
    I have no reason to see it. Of course I have only seen the first episode. It wasn't bad but nothing special either. I taped it's reruns on NBC to see it there. I just don't know if it will be in order. It's wasn't on SCI-FI.

  • Review: Great for fans, so-so for everyone else (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ChaosDiscord ( 4913 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @07:09PM (#13689898) Homepage Journal

    As a fan of the series, it's a great movie. Whedon did a great job of taking what I assume was several seasons of plot lines and collapsing them into a two hour movie. The result flowed well and didn't feel too rushed. I do suspect that spreading many of the developments over the course of many episodes would have made the important revelations all the more significant. As closure for the series, I'm very satisfied.

    However, I'm pessimistic for people who haven't seen the series. Whedon does an admirable job providing a Cliff's Notes of the series. He even does so in a way that doesn't bug me as a fan; indeed several minor details that were never expounded upon in the series were cleared up. However much of power of the series was the attachment you formed to the characters. That's something that takes hours. You can't do it in a movie.

    So I suspect the movie will do well in the short term as the fans flock to it, then it will quietly fade away. This will be the end of the series; it will remain with a cult fandom, but nothing more. (That said, I'm surprised at the positive reviews it's getting [rottentomatoes.com] from people I doubt are fans.)

  • Best non-spoiler review so far (Score:3, Informative)

    by Dr. Spork ( 142693 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @09:48PM (#13690920)
    Here is a very insightful review from an unlikely source:

    http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/25438/ [alternet.org]

  • Alliance == giant != evil (Score:4, Informative)

    by corporate zombie ( 218482 ) on Friday September 30, 2005 @11:52PM (#13691472)
    So the Alliance is giant but not evil.

    http://homepage.mac.com/merussell/iblog/B835531044 /C1592678312/E20050916182427/index.html [mac.com]

    Section II, first question.

    M.E. Russel (Q): "Firefly" and "Serenity"'s political and cultural underpinnings are unusually well thought-out. You've obviously developed a whole system of planets, a Sino-American political system, a mix of languages. How long did the concept fester in your head before you started writing?

    Joss Whedon (A): It festered for a while. It was probably two or three years after I came up with the idea that I made the TV show, a year-and-a-half doing that, and then a couple of years to write the movie. So it's had time to bake. And people are always like, "They're fighting an evil empire!" And I'm like, "Well, it's not really an evil empire." The trick was always to create something that was complex enough that you could bring some debate to it -- that it wasn't black-and-white. It wasn't, "If we hit this porthole in the Death Star, everything will be fine!" It was messier than that, and the messiest thing is that the government is basically benign. It's the most advanced culturally....

    More of the same (not evil) later in the interview.

    -CZ

Slashdot Top Deals

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?

Close