Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Firefly Movie Gets The Green Light

Posted by simoniker on Wed Mar 03, 2004 11:32 PM
from the big-screen-says-hello-to-reevers dept.
An anonymous reader writes "According to FireflyFans.net and Ain't It Cool News, Universal has greenlit production of 'Serenity,' the motion picture based on Joss Whedon's cancelled TV series 'Firefly.' Both sites point to an article from Variety that says the film will start production in June, and be ready for release in 2005." The informative Whedonesque weblog is also monitoring developments regarding this much-deserved resurrection.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • firefly (Score:5, Insightful)

    by panxerox (575545) * on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:34PM (#8460166)
    OIC firefly is good enough for a dvd set and good enough for a movie but not good enough for a series. Sometimes I wonder about the people making the decisions. Are they making a decision to not do a series because of business reasons or just well because they say so and those weenie viewers arent going to change our minds because they might get it in their heads that they matter. Yes I'm bitter. Its like they say "come here viewers come check out this great new series!" then they go "SUCKERS !! haha no show for you !!".
    • Re:firefly (Score:5, Insightful)

      by eatenn (572604) <{ten.doglacol} {ta} {eetnne}> on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:55PM (#8460299)
      (http://localgod.net/)
      "OIC firefly is good enough for a dvd set and good enough for a movie but not good enough for a series."

      Financially speaking, I would say that Firefly may actually be better suited to movies than television. Whedon's shows are excellent... and also extremely expensive. Having to spend huge amounts of money for 22 episodes every year means that the corporate heads demand a pretty big payback pretty damn quick. Fox couldn't really afford for viewers to ease into the show (and God knows a Friday night time-slot didn't help). It's for similar reasons that Buffy left the WB and Angel was recently cancelled.

      As a motion picture though, they spend the big bucks once and reap the benefits for months in merchandise, rentals, etc. You don't get that kind of a pay-off with TV (at least not that quickly). I love Whedon's serial storytelling, but I'm excited to see how he adapts to the big screen.

      [ Parent ]
      • Re:firefly by Issue9mm (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:12AM
        • Re:firefly (Score:5, Insightful)

          by teraph (147902) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:31AM (#8460458)
          Hopefully he's improved on his big-screen capabilities since the original Buffy and Alien 4. Ick.

          Well, it's hard to tell what the original scripts were like. A good script can become awful between the day it's bought and the day it's released in a theater.

          You have a half-dozen suits, directors, and editors to screw it up. (We're assuming here that the original script was good.)

          seeing how he much time he's taken in perfecting the series runs he's had, I have little doubt that Serenity will be spectacular.

          Yes. His TV shows are probably the better indicator of the quality of his writing, since that is where he has the most control. Everything he has done for film has had multiple hands, for good or ill. (And he's repeatedly stated his disappointment at both the Buffy movie and Alien Resurrection. He was once mis-identified as having written an episode of "Boy Meets World" and he expressed more pride in that incorrect credit than his writing of Resurrection.)

          It's possible that the Firefly film will suck, maybe because he fails to produce a good script, maybe because Universal selects someone else to direct, maybe because the producers demand bad changes.

          That's why he's better in TV. Head writers (who are almost always the producers) are nearly Gods with regard to how their scripts read and show up on screen. The network has some input, but much of it is Standards and Practices stuff (i.e., the censors).

          In film, the producers own the script and can do as they please. And then the director is in control the moment shooting starts (with input from the producers).

          Film writing is good money, but it's very little control. (Unless you make it yourself.)
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:firefly (Score:5, Insightful)

          by eatenn (572604) <{ten.doglacol} {ta} {eetnne}> on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:34AM (#8460478)
          (http://localgod.net/)
          Hopefully he's improved on his big-screen capabilities since the original Buffy and Alien 4. Ick.

          Yeck. Being president of the Joss Whedon Stalker Club, I may be a little biased, but I've read Whedon's draft of the Buffy movie (which he didn't direct), and the version that actually made it to the theatres... Whedon's draft is much better. Apparently Donald Sutherland insisted on writing his own dialog, the studio wanted it to be more of a teen comedy, and the director didn't understand the material. It's the nature of the business that scripts get fucked with by a series of producers, directors, and studio heads who are constantly looking for ways to fit a monkey into the story somehow.

          Whedon has also stated that no one hates Alien 4 more than he does. He had other people dictating what he was supposed to write.

          I've also had the experience in film school having one of my scripts approved for production and then butchered beyond all recognition. It ain't fun.

          [ Parent ]
          • Re:firefly (Score:5, Informative)

            by gilroy (155262) on Thursday March 04 2004, @02:56AM (#8461048)
            (http://www.adfinemfidelis.net/mongrel/ | Last Journal: Friday August 23 2002, @11:47PM)
            Blockquoth the poster:

            Whedon has also stated that no one hates Alien 4 more than he does. He had other people dictating what he was supposed to write.

            The IMDb has an interesting trivia point about this, on the entry for Angel [imdb.com] :

            In the episode "Fredless", when talking about the Aliens series, a character says, "He's always had a thing for those 'Aliens' movies. Except for that last one they made - I think he dozed off." Series creator Joss Whedon wrote the script for Alien: Resurrection (1997), although it was heavily rewritten.

            [ Parent ]
          • Re:firefly by Udo Schmitz (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @05:10AM
        • He is the director this time (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Per Abrahamsen (1397) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:08AM (#8461089)
          (http://www.dina.kvl.dk/~abraham/)
          The Buffy movie has a very different feel than the series, which Joss claim is because the director had a different vision than Joss did.

          Alien 4 feel a lot more like City of Lost Children than an Alien movie. Again, the directors influence. One other write with a Usenet presense (I believe it wa Peter A. David) claimed he got into Buffy by wathing Alien 4, and seeing a good script being burried behind a misunderstood direction, and got currios about the writer.

          Titan AE was actually pretty good, but I don't know how much of Joss writting was involved. There was a couple of places that were clearly Joss though. The intelligent guard, and Planet Bob were Joss trademark humor.

          This time Joss gets to both write and direct the movie according to the Variety article, so we will be able to judge directly his abilities as a movie maker. From the few Buffy episodes he has written and directed himself (like Hush and Once More With Feeling), I believe we are in for a treat.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:firefly (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Snaller (147050) on Thursday March 04 2004, @07:45AM (#8461896)
          (Last Journal: Tuesday June 26, @08:41AM)
          Hopefully he's improved on his big-screen capabilities since the original Buffy and Alien 4. Ick

          If you knew the background you would know that they are not him. He was just a little guy who should shut up then. In interviews he has pretty much indicated that Donald Sutherland was an arrogant prick who though he was gods gift to the universe and who readily changed the script ("Improved" it Sorbo style) (which is probably why he never accepted improvisation on the TV series), and the director didn't see it Joss's way either and wanted to improve it etc. Same thing with resurection:
          "("I asked the director, "Can you just explain to me why he's doing this? Why is he going for this gun?" And the editor, who was French, turned to me and said, with a little leer on his face, [adopts gravelly, smarmy, French-accented voice] "Because eets een the screept." And I actually went and dented the bathroom stall with my puddly little fist. I have never been angrier. But it's the classic, "When something goes wrong, you assume the writers a dork. And that's painful."

          But now, not only does he write, he also directs, and his buddy Chris Buchanan is one of the executive producers - I'd say its a safe bet that this time he has much more control. Of course not ultimate, because universal is paying and could demand scenes with half nake showgirls twirling their tassles - one can only hope they stay away and let Whedon win them that Oscar we know he is capable of :)
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:firefly by TheCyko1 (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:02AM
        • Re:firefly (Score:5, Interesting)

          by TheLoneDanger (611268) on Thursday March 04 2004, @02:48AM (#8461019)
          It was Mandarin, except for one part when the engine breaks down and the ship broadcasts a warning that oxygen's low, check life support etc. That was Cantonese spoken fluently. I assume they just asked someone Chinese to say what they wanted "in Chinese" and that person just assumed Cantonese (which is fairly prevalent in North America).

          The inconsistency bugged me a bit, but I was happy to actually understand what was being said for once (I only know a little Mandarin, and it was butchered so badly that the only one I could make out was mei-mei).

          Interestingly enough, Jayne's actor seemed to speak Mandarin a bit better than everyone else. In the DVD extras he talks about it a bit, and I assume he practiced it more.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:firefly by kalidasa (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:32PM
      • Re:firefly (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Udo Schmitz (738216) on Thursday March 04 2004, @05:02AM (#8461434)
        (Last Journal: Tuesday October 09, @06:49AM)
        Whedon's shows are excellent... and also extremely expensive.

        I always hear that, but noone ever gives any numbers? Did you pull that "fact" out of your ass, or can you give me any prove for that claim? I'm pretty sure any StarTrek show is far more expensive. Still the FX look worse. The planet sceneries sometimes look like in the classic series.

        [ Parent ]
        • Re:firefly by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @02:48PM
        • Firefly cost. by I am Jack's username (Score:2) Wednesday March 10 2004, @05:00AM
      • Re:firefly by jafac (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @02:44PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:firefly by Cecil (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:21AM
      • Re:firefly by B3ryllium (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:09AM
    • Re:firefly by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:32AM
    • Re:firefly (Score:4, Informative)

      by PowerPill (687850) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:55AM (#8460569)
      Fox had never zipped up the deal for a complete season of Firefly so right from the start it was a nail biter for Joss. Fox didn't even allow the premiere (Serenity) to be the premiere because they thought it lacked a certain pace. If you take notice, Fox generally takes the approach of more action right at the get go = better ratings over elegantly gripping television. So yes, it was that Whedon's vision didn't quite fit Fox's business model or formula rather. All of this is actually touched on in the box set.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:firefly (Score:4, Insightful)

        by mbourgon (186257) on Thursday March 04 2004, @08:27AM (#8462035)
        (http://slashdot.org/)
        All of this is actually touched on in the box set.

        Touched on isn't the word I'd use. It's heavily talked about during both Serenity (the Pilot) & The Train Job. Joss certainly doesn't hold back during the commentary. Never has the "commentary may not reflect the studio's views" warning been more apt.
        [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Strange. (Score:5, Funny)

    by nefele (654499) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:35PM (#8460175)
    So they actually decided to make a movie about a web browser?
    Oh, wait...
  • Obligatory. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Trejkaz (615352) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:35PM (#8460177)
    (http://trypticon.org/)
    Serenity Now!!
    • Re:Obligatory. by anagama (Score:3) Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:57PM
      • Re:Obligatory. by Trejkaz (Score:2) Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:59PM
      • Re:Obligatory. (Score:5, Informative)

        by TheLoneDanger (611268) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:52AM (#8460561)
        Full opening theme lyrics:

        Take my love, take my land,
        Take me where I can not stand.
        I don't care, I'm still free;
        You can't take the sky from me.

        Take me out to the black,
        Tell them I ain't coming back.
        Burn the land and boil the sea;
        You can't take the sky from me.

        There's no place I can be,
        Since I've found Serenity.
        But you can't take the sky from me.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Obligatory. by NeuroKoan (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:54AM
          • Re:Obligatory. by TheLoneDanger (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @02:23AM
            • Re:Obligatory. by NeuroKoan (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @02:29AM
              • Re:Obligatory. by B3ryllium (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:12AM
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Obligatory. by Keebler71 (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @08:48AM
          • Re:Obligatory. by Daniel Dvorkin (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @09:51AM
          • Re:Obligatory. by LoveMuscle (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:40PM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Obligatory. by B3ryllium (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:18AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Curse of the F's (Score:5, Funny)

    by KoopaTroopa (549540) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:36PM (#8460185)
    (http://cs.unc.edu/~culp/)
    They're really naming it Serenity to avoid being prematurely cut off during production. This would surely have happened had the name started with 'F'.

    Firefly - cancelled
    Family Guy - cancelled
    Futurama - cancelled

    Someone ought to cancel Fox.

  • New Series (Score:5, Interesting)

    While a movie would be nice, I would rather have the series returen. Firefly was one of the few shows I've watched that I really like and made it a point to watch, instead of just watching it if it was on like most other shows.

    • Re:New Series (Score:4, Interesting)

      by blincoln (592401) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:43PM (#8460227)
      (Last Journal: Sunday March 21 2004, @11:14PM)
      While a movie would be nice, I would rather have the series returen.

      Allegedly Whedon's plan is to use a successful film as a springboard for a follow-up series.

      I would be happy with him either keeping it in theatres or switching back to TV, as long as he gets to finish the story one way or another.

      Also, is it me, or is this "press release" more of a series of writer's notes?

      To that end, he said he went out of his way while penning the "Serenity" script to make sure that it is accessible to auds who never tuned into "Firefly."

      "Auds"? Obviously this is short for "audience," but still. Let's move on.

      Series was a space oater set 500 years in the future, tracking the journeys of the crew aboard the Serenity.

      Ah yes, a "space oater." I'm fond of those.

      Chris Buchanan of Mutant Enemy, Whedon's shingle, and Mendel exec Alissa Tager are exec producing.

      "Whedon's shingle," uh huh...
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:New Series by steeef (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:25AM
      • Re:New Series by NOLAChief (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:41AM
        • Re:New Series by fenix down (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @11:19AM
      • Hollywoodspeak by Udo Schmitz (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @05:15AM
      • Re:New Series by Snaller (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @08:13AM
        • Re:New Series by Chris Mattern (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @09:06AM
          • Re:New Series by Snaller (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:39PM
      • Re:New Series by primordial ooze (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @08:34AM
        • Re:New Series by Tetsujin28 (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:36PM
          • Re:New Series by primordial ooze (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:02PM
            • Re:New Series by Tetsujin28 (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:29PM
              • Re:New Series by primordial ooze (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:38PM
          • Re:New Series by kalidasa (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:37PM
            • Re:New Series by Tetsujin28 (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @02:33PM
      • Re:New Series by Chris Mattern (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @09:03AM
      • Re:New Series by llefler (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:34PM
      • n00b by irokitt (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:05PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:New Series (Score:5, Insightful)

      by prockcore (543967) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:47PM (#8460252)
      I would rather have the series returen

      Joss Whedon should call up USA. With Monk and Dead Zone it's obvious that USA isn't afraid to back a strange-yet-brilliant show.

      Or maybe FX (Nip Tuck, The Shield) or Bravo (Keen Eddie, Touching Evil).

      Cable is really the only place you can find good shows that don't dumb down to the common denominator.

      Fox is just stupid. How much money are they making from the Firefly dvds and Family Guy dvds? Compare that with how much money you would expect an any reality TV DVD to make.

      In a couple of years, fox is going to have to reach all the way back to In Living Colour in order to make DVD sales... because no one wants to buy anything that they currently air.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:New Series by patternjuggler (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:38AM
      • Re:New Series (Score:5, Informative)

        by Platinum Dragon (34829) on Thursday March 04 2004, @01:16AM (#8460640)
        (http://platinumdragon.ca/ | Last Journal: Monday May 23 2005, @01:59AM)
        Can someone point out what was especially good about it? I'll grant without having seen more than half an episode that it was better than Enterprise or any other show in the genre on tv currently, but that's not saying much.

        I'll take a shot at this one. I've been catching the episodes on Canada's SPACE channel, and to me the series definitely had a fairly solid setting and mood in its first season, which is rare for a sci-fi series.

        The show fuses sci-fi space conventions with Wild West-era characters and environments. The whole "space Western" thing is not subtle, but that might actually be a good thing. I've found that when sci-fi producers try to be "subtle", their works ends up coming across as obvious and pretentious, like the ST:TNG episodes that tried to disguise the contemporary parallels, then beat you over the head with The Contemporary Moral Message. The Western aspects aren't taken so far as to be implausibly anachronistic; the six-shooters and shotguns seem to fire some kind of directed energy instead of projectiles, and there is still advanced technology. It just so happens the super-cool machines have some rust and loose screws, which only adds to the plausibility. I still have some trouble conceiving of just what volume of space the series takes place within, but then again, technobabble is kept at a minimum, which is a plus.

        What little CGI I really took notice of looked pretty darn good, which isn't difficult to do nowadays--but then, compare Firefly to Babylon 5's first season and a half, and Starhunter. Also, there is no sound in space scenes. This threw me at first, but it's also accurate. For all the lack of adherence to anything resembling physics and scientific accuracy, I found this to be a nice touch.

        Firefly worked really well in a contained-episode format, instead of the plot arcs that damn near everyone tries to shoehorn into shows now. Thing is, Whedon has shown a tendency to start with just such a pure episode format, then eventually move the series into multi-episode or even full-season arcs. This makes the short life of the series even rougher, because the creative team didn't even have a chance to really go places with the show.

        Incidentally, J. Michael Straczynski's Crusade series died under similar conflicts with its network (demands for more sex and violence, episode juggling harming continuity), and it appeared to be developing in a similar fashion. JMS had the pressure of following up Babylon 5 with an expected second strong effort right from the start. When TNT demanded new episodes be shot and aired before the originally-shot episodes could see airtime, there was little chance the series' potential would be realized early on, or allowed to develop.

        I wonder how amazing Firefly could have been in further seasons, given time to settle in. I say it again, the series felt quite well-realized for a first-season sci-fi program, and it got cut off at the knees by a network known more for trashy "reality" TV and amusing cartoons than fantasy and science fiction.
        [ Parent ]
        • Speaking of B5 by Rand Race (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @10:13AM
        • Re:New Series by stonecypher (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @03:01PM
        • Re:New Series by Richard Jones (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @07:58PM
      • Re:New Series by ShinyBrowncoat (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @11:08AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:New Series by mshiltonj (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @05:38AM
  • Why do I get the feeling.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ImTwoSlick (723185) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:38PM (#8460197)
    ... that they like to cancel great TV shows, just to make a few extra bucks on a movie they know people have been dying to see.
  • Thanks to Firefly... (Score:5, Funny)

    by devphil (51341) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:40PM (#8460212)
    (http://www.devphil.com/)


    ...I am terrified of people in business suits wearing bright blue gloves.

    On the up side, I know now how to say "Fuck everyone in the universe to death!", "Shut up," and my favorite, "Holy mother of God and all her wacky nephews!" in Mandarin Chinese.

  • Serenity? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Daetrin (576516) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:40PM (#8460213)
    I hope they're referencing the ship and not the battle the ship was named for. If it's the battle we'll miss out on most of our favorite characters :(
    • Re:Serenity? by eatenn (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:02AM
      • Re:Serenity? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Chris Carollo (251937) on Thursday March 04 2004, @01:30AM (#8460699)
        Alan Tudyk, who plays Wash, reportedly stole the Big Red Button that was used during the episode "Out of Gas", and left it with Joss, telling him to "hit it when his miracle arrived" and they would all return.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Serenity? by ruprechtjones (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:40AM
    • Re:Serenity? by Udo Schmitz (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @05:20AM
  • Go Browncoats! (Score:5, Funny)

    by torgosan (141603) * on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:43PM (#8460226)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    Shiny!
  • Script on Kazaa (Score:1, Funny)

    by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:46PM (#8460246)
    (http://www.grub.net/blog/index.html | Last Journal: Wednesday June 27, @08:48AM)

    The script is already leaked:

    Overlord Busche: You vile Freedonian varmints, give us all rights to yer planetary oil then destroy yer WMD and we won't be shootin' ya with our Laser Cannons..
    Sahdamm: but.. Freedonia ain't got no WMD, your people confirmed it!
    Busche: Prepare to liberate Freedonia! Jebus commands it!
    • Sahdamm? by Cyno01 (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:15AM
      • Re:Sahdamm? by RexxFiend (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @11:17AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • won't be that great as movie (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:47PM (#8460254)
    The movie won't be able to depend on knowledge of the TV series because there isn't a large enough fanbase. That means they will have to condense a lot into 90 minutes. Firefly is so good because of the time allowed to develop the characters in a TV series. So while non-fans may have some visual effect treats and see SOME of the flavor of the show, it won't be able to touch the series; and fans will be disappointed because the movie will have to be introductory and won't pick up where the show left off.

    TV show movies that do well are those that ran a long time and therefor have a large fanbase.

    This will just be another scifi movie.

  • AWESOME (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cirrius (304487) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:48PM (#8460257)
    I recently picked up the box set to check out the series, and this is great news...I was surprised how good the series was and perplexed as to why such a show was canceled.
  • Don't Wander Around Best Buy (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ralph Wiggam (22354) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:51PM (#8460274)
    (http://www.fufme.com/)
    Seeing the article made me want to buy the DVD set. I liked the concept of the show a lot, but didn't catch many of them. In Star Trek, everyone has neatly groomed hair and they're always nice to each other. Firefly seemed to be about normal, flawed people who happen to fly around in space.

    Anyway, I go to BestBuy.com to see how much it costs. Only 40 bucks is a good deal. Here's the messed up part. On the web site, and presumably on the store shelves, the Firefly DVD set is listed under "Horror". Their subgroups under horror are "Comedies, Occult, Vampires, Zombies, and General Horror". At least it's not under Zombies.

    -B
  • Converts after cancellation (Score:5, Insightful)

    by loftydog (562124) * on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:52PM (#8460277)

    Fox did everything it could to kill this show.

    First, they aired the episodes in a random order so there was no continuity

    Second, they changed the time it was aired, then changed the day, all within a span of three weeks

    Third, and most insulting, is that they assumed the demographic watching Firefly would switch to watching Fastlane, as some of the numbers from Nielson were similar

    Sadly, I've had more people become "fans" of the show after the cancellattion by loaning them the DVDs, with most of them not being scifi fans.

  • Cast announced (Score:4, Insightful)

    by redkingca (610398) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:53PM (#8460285)
    I don't see Ron Glass("the shepard") listed in the returning cast list. I wonder what is going on there? While not my favourite character, the shepard seems to have a more shady past than any.
    from the press release:
    ...The Serenity cast will include such returning "Firefly" cast members as Nathan Fillion as Captain Malcolm 'Mal' Reynolds, Gina Torres as Zoe Warren, Morena Baccarin as Inara Serra, Jewel Staite as Kaylee Frye, Adam Baldwin as Jayne Cobb, Sean Maher as Dr. Simon Tam and Summer Glau as River Tam.
    • Re:Cast announced by torgosan (Score:2) Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:56PM
    • Kaylee... by MachDelta (Score:3) Thursday March 04 2004, @12:04AM
      • Re:Kaylee... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by brandonY (575282) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:21AM (#8461121)
        Yeah, she was amazingly hot. On the DVD, they point out that Whedon, in his infinite wisdom, told her that she could be on the show, but she would have to gain 20 pounds so she would look like a real human. Bless the man.
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:Kaylee... by goodEvans (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @11:36AM
    • Guess Mr. Glass will be in by Udo Schmitz (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @05:33AM
    • cast list by Savatte (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @10:53AM
      • Re:cast list by redkingca (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @04:47PM
      • Re:cast list by dgagley (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @07:30PM
  • Josh Whedon the genius.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by GonzoTech (613147) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:02AM (#8460334)
    Josh Whedon is a genius. Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, and Firefly were all wonderful shows. Firefly and Angel were both cancelled way to early.. but especially Firefly. Only one season? I guess Americans are too hung up on shows like Fear Factor, Survivor, American Idol, and any other show that uses very childish antics to develop a fan base. I for one hope that Josh Whedon will continue with wonderful writing, concepts, and work - maybe people will catch on and see what we have seen for years (A brilliant mind in an industry full of flakes.)
  • Probably offtopic, but... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by JayBlalock (635935) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:13AM (#8460384)
    Why is it there's going to be a Firefly film, but still no Babylon 5 movie?
  • All I can say is... ...ahem...

    WHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! WHOOOOOOOO!!!

    Seriously, if you have no idea what the fuss is about, buy/borrow/steal the DVDs and watch them. The only downside was watching half way through an excellent season, and realizing you would never get to see everything resolved.

    If nothing else, the movie will be a chance to give the series the ending it deserved. If it leads to a resurrection of the series, even better.
  • Hallelujah! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bbsguru (586178) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:22AM (#8460420)
    (http://www.dotloose.com/ | Last Journal: Wednesday August 18 2004, @03:23PM)
    The long months in the wilderness are at an end, brethren! And on the day I finished re-viewing the last of the DVD extras for the umpteenth time!

    This is great news. Note that it is Universal now, not Fox, so there really could be another series at the end of the trail here.

    Since the DVD set came out, I have introduced the series to a dozen 'Fly newbies, all of whom are as swept away as I was. It's just too fanastic a program to let it go, and no maybe (just maybe?) we won't have to.

    Shiny!

    • Re:Hallelujah! by DragonTHC (Score:1) Thursday March 04 2004, @01:21AM
  • Serenity? (Score:5, Funny)

    by ShinyBrowncoat (692095) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:27AM (#8460440)
    (http://www.fireflymovie.com/)
    They are calling the movie 'Serenity'? Now what am I supposed to do with all these Firefly Movie posters [fireflymovie.com]?
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • "Blue Sun" rises? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by teneighty (671401) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:38AM (#8460505)
    When you watch the movie, keep an eye out for a bigger role for the Blue Sun corporation. The series merely hinted at their role, but I think we can expect to see Blue Sun emerging as the bad guys, rather than the Alliance.

    The hints? In the original episodes, watch at how River reacts to anything with the Blue Sun logo on it - Jayne's shirt, labels on cans, and so on.
  • Anyone know when "Gateway" [amazon.com] is supposed to be finished, or even if its still in production?

    That's one movie I can honestly say I'm looking forward to seeing, no matter how it comes out ...
  • Plot intro, and more info (Score:5, Informative)

    When Mal takes on two new passengers - a young doctor and his unstable, telepathic sister - he gets much more than he bargained for. The pair are fugitives from the coalition dominating the universe, who will stop at nothing to reclaim the girl. The crew that was once used to skimming the outskirts of the galaxy unnoticed find themselves caught between the unstoppable military force of the Universal Alliance and the horrific, cannibalistic fury of the Reavers, savages who roam the very edge of space. Hunted by vastly different enemies, they begin to discover that the greatest danger to them may be on board "Serenity" herself.

    More info here [comingsoon.net].

  • That's good (Score:2)

    by Cyberllama (113628) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:35AM (#8461155)
    I enjoyed firefly and was sad to see it go -- but I'd still really like a Farscape movie. I need resolution damnit!
  • The campaign to Save Angel (Score:5, Informative)

    by The Lynxpro (657990) <lynxproNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:54AM (#8461224)
    I'm placing this in here because most FireFly fans are probably also fans of Whedon's other program, Angel. As you know, the WB Network made the announcement that they will not be renewing Angel for the sixth season, despite its majorly improved ratings over last year and that its the #2 show on their network for the major 18-34 aged advertising demographic.

    If you wish to help with the efforts to save the show, there are several websites coordinating fan activities, and I will list them here:

    Petition Online:
    Here's the petition protesting the cancellation of the program. Please sign it and join the 72,000 + other fans who already have...
    http://www.petitiononline.com/ai5d0162/pe tition.ht ml

    http://www.savingangel.org/
    Saving Angel is placing ads in the Hollywood Reporter and Variety. You can find them here:

    http://www.supportangel.org/
    Support Angel has been coordinating a lot of the fan base postcard campaigns. They are a great source of information.

    Some of the other information you'll find on the pages include the fact that Tribune Broadcasting itself (a 20% + shareholder in The WB Network) is encouraging fans to protest the cancellation. The WB wants to replace Angel either with a teen version of "Dark Shadows" or another revamp of "Lost in Space." It is reported that UPN has passed on picking up the show because they'd rather try to run their own version of "Teen Wolf" and borrowing heavily from the Buffy (Whedon) format to make it a success.

    If you've been holding off on purchasing any of the Angel Season Sets on DVD, now is the time to purchase them; the networks ARE watching the sales figures. Remember, Fox decided to relaunch "Family Guy" after witnessing their sales success. And while UPN might have passed on picking up Angel for Season Six, we still have TNT, FX Network (fitting since Angel is a Twentieth-Century Fox production), SciFi, or even Tribune Broadcasting syndication to fall back upon!

  • Firefly (Score:2)

    by Chris_Pugrud (16615) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:55AM (#8461227)
    I have loved every show, including all of the DVD. I hope this makes it to reality.
  • So when I submitted this story... (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by corebreech (469871) on Thursday March 04 2004, @05:11AM (#8461453)
    (Last Journal: Monday November 01 2004, @04:55AM)
    ...like a month ago and saw it rejected I guess that's because I have cooties or something, is this correct?
  • Joss Whedon is ... (Score:1)

    by jeff13 (255285) on Thursday March 04 2004, @07:49AM (#8461907)
    (http://www.geocities.com/jeff13_731/)
    ... a frellin' genius! He is responsible for the cult TV zeitgeist of this generation. Truly, nothing this intellegent and entertaining has come along since the original Star Trek.

    You can tell because they cancelled it.
  • by Green Light (32766) on Thursday March 04 2004, @08:06AM (#8461962)
    (Last Journal: Saturday March 02 2002, @08:43AM)
    Taking a lesson from the litigious ones, I'm going to sue somebody today!
  • What a let down... (Score:1)

    by RayMarron (657336) on Thursday March 04 2004, @10:17AM (#8463239)
    (http://www.raymarron.com/)
    I glanced at the title, and immediately thought it was the movie adaptation of the Piers Anthony book of the same name. Bummer!
  • Whedon to write X-Men (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 04 2004, @10:26AM (#8463348)
    A little addendum to this story for Whedon fans, he's going to be writing Astonishing X-Men for Marvel Comics, starting in May, I believe.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by AskFirefly (757114) on Thursday March 04 2004, @11:18AM (#8464074)
    Universal is going to have a hell of a time marketing this movie in wide release. I love this show, it has an A-1 cast and great, complex characters, but there are no "marquee" names in the cast to draw in people who never paid attention to the show in the first place. The fans will see it multiple times, buy the DVD, et all, but just as with the Star Trek films, "Serenity" has to appeal to a wider audience than just the fans to be a success. This will be a real challenge for Mutant Enemy and Universal, and I hope they pull it off. Also, I can't wait to see the Mutant Enemy "Grr! Arrgh!" on the big screen.... :)
  • by affeking (315129) on Thursday March 04 2004, @11:24AM (#8464177)
    Its good to hear Firefly is getting another chance. I wonder if its success may bring back the series.

    In the meantime, lets not forget Joss' most recent loss with the cancelation of Angel. Anyone think it has a chance of coming back from the grave? Take a look at one of the efforts to bring it back:
    www.savingangel.com
  • by eadint (156250) on Thursday March 04 2004, @11:26AM (#8464199)
    (http://www.adint.net/ | Last Journal: Friday October 04 2002, @12:27PM)
    Im so happy that this is going to be a movie. when i realized that they didnt have sound in space i thought wow they really are trying to be realistic. and i think that the future will be more like this not like star trek, star trek was a disgusting abourtion.
  • Classic lines. (Score:2)

    by wdavies (163941) on Thursday March 04 2004, @11:29AM (#8464245)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    Well, I sat and watched Firefly back to back over a week or so. Brilliant. I found a new favorite science fiction quote to add to my collection... Actually Bladerunner and Aliens are so chock full, its hard to pick the best, but these are my choices.

    Blade Runner:
    Roy: I've seen things you little people wouldn't believe, attack ships on fire of the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near Tannhauser Gate. All those...moments will be lost...in time, like tears...in rain. Time...to die.

    Aliens:
    Hudson: Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?
    Vasquez: No, have you?

    Firefly:
    Wash: This sounds like something outta science fiction.
    Zoe: Honey, you live on a spaceship.

  • Garb! (Score:1)

    by ChozSun (49528) on Thursday March 04 2004, @06:44PM (#8470204)
    (http://www.chozsun.com/)
    The question is not will I be at the opening but what garb will I wear?

    All my clothes are like Jayne's and Wash's but I leaning towards Suits with Blue Gloves if I can find gloves that blue.

    My only thought about missing Wash and Book in their listing of the characters is that it is a long freaking list. I have to think that those two will be in it.

    If for nothing else: Book is the most dangerous. He was a good enough shot to only shoot baddies in the knees.

    ZOE
    Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killing?

    BOOK
    Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps.
  • by msmoriarty (195788) on Thursday March 04 2004, @07:02PM (#8470401)
    As a complete Firefly fanatic, the only way I can see that I won't like this movie (even if it truly sucks) is if the entire cast doesn't return. I just don't see it right now without all of them.

    Thankfully, most of my favorite characters (Preacher -- Ron Glass just rocks, Jayne) are played by actors who don't seem to have their schedules *that* booked. (*VERY* happy for them that they'll have this work.) But the article I read this morning said that *most* of the cast will return...Is there someone that they *know* they can't get?

    Figure that they wouldn't do it with a different Malcom, but what about Zoe? (The actress signed on to bigger and better things, but the way she played that character is one of my favorite things about the show.)

    Is there anyone out there who wouldn't mind if a different actor stepped in to take over one of the roles? If so, which one? Who would you have play it?

  • Re:Can't Wait (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ralph Wiggam (22354) on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:40PM (#8460215)
    (http://www.fufme.com/)
    IIRC, BraveStarr involved space-age stuff but was set in a western, Earth-based setting. Didn't the action figures have some cool electronic abilities? Was that the cartoon with "Eyes of the hawk, ears of the wolf, stregth of the bear...speed of the puma"?

    -B
    [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Re:WTF (Score:5, Funny)

    by eatenn (572604) <{ten.doglacol} {ta} {eetnne}> on Wednesday March 03 2004, @11:59PM (#8460323)
    (http://localgod.net/)
    Cancel a television series to make a movie based on it?

    I know, isn't that crazy? Next thing you know they'll be making a television series out of a box office flop [imdb.com].

    Oh wait...

    [ Parent ]
    • Re:WTF by mbourgon (Score:2) Thursday March 04 2004, @08:42AM
  • Re:are people happy? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ShinyBrowncoat (692095) on Thursday March 04 2004, @12:39AM (#8460508)
    (http://www.fireflymovie.com/)
    this is the worst news every. this pretty much is the last nail in the coffin for the series. they're gonna wrap everything up for us fans and send us on our way!
    Actually, no. Joss Whedon's original movie script did this, but after seeing the amazing DVD sales, the powers that be asked Joss to re-write the script to be 'more of a springboard to an eventual series return'...
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:I'm troll and I'm proud. (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Justabit (651314) <Cash2You@@@bigpond...net...au> on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:33AM (#8461147)
    Do you remember the movie that had the actor from 'John Boy' as the young inpresionable backwater farm planet take the familys sentient spaceship out to find a group of heros to defend his comunity. It had 5 white clone aliens, an Amazon busty princess, the guy from UNCLE as a black spy type, and a caracter called 'Spacecowboy'. The whole western in space theme really worked for that film. Come to think of it Star Wars is a western space melding as well.
    [ Parent ]
  • by harlows_monkeys (106428) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:37AM (#8461161)
    (http://www.tzs.net/)
    Wheadon seems to not understand the enormous amounts of energy required for space travel, and moving livestock around is just not going to pay for it

    You have absolutely no clue whatsoever how much energy would be required for such space travel, because in real life there is neither any theory nor any experiment that covers faster-than-light travel. Once your suspension of disbelief goes so far as to allow FTL, trying to do things like energy calculations is just silly.

    You also have no clue at all what the value of livestock might be in an interstellar economy. If that livestock is key to allowing a colony to thrive on a planet, it could be very valuable.

    And ancient projectile weapons? I'm sorry, my suspension of disbelief only goes so far

    So you have no problem with FTL, which is something that is, as far as we know currently, impossible, but having some people using projectile weapons while others use more sophisticated weapons bothers you? Even though if you just look around on Earth, you can find societies that still use rocks and pointed sticks?

    This is one of the things that Firefly got right that most other science fiction gets wrong--technology is too uniform in most science fiction. Based on a couple thousand years of Earth history, it is far more believable to have a wide range of technology.

    [ Parent ]
  • by thedude11937 (742469) on Thursday March 04 2004, @03:39AM (#8461170)
    you dident watch the show did you
    [ Parent ]
  • by gibodean (224873) on Thursday March 04 2004, @06:00AM (#8461601)
    Why have you been hassling your local DVD people ?

    Ever heard of ordering over the internet from the US ?

    That's what I did, and the series is excellent.

    You'll need a multiregion player, but who doesn't have one of those ?
    [ Parent ]
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by AzrealAO (520019) on Thursday March 04 2004, @09:14AM (#8462447)
    Fox cancelled the show.

    Joss Whedon tried to shop the show around to other networks trying to get it picked up, but was unsuccessful.

    Decided to try and get a movie made, managed to get that green lighted.

    Best hope is that the movie will be successful enough to give him more ammunition trying to get the show picked up for a second season.
    [ Parent ]
  • by Zed2K (313037) on Thursday March 04 2004, @10:45AM (#8463612)
    This is not trolling, this is truth. If the thing was anything more than a boring mess it would have succeeded. But it was a major snoozer right out of the gate. Usually shows try to get better as the episodes are aired, but this one didn't it was as dry after the last episode aired as it was when the first episode aired. I so wanted to like it but I refuse to like something just because of who does it. It has to be actually, oh I don't know, good?
    [ Parent ]
  • by Fantastic Lad (198284) on Thursday March 04 2004, @11:55AM (#8464600)
    which milked Buffy. Virtually all of the moments of 'lame' in Buffy can be attributed to other people getting their chance at the control stick.

    Joss withdrew the bulk of his influence long before Buffy finally wrapped, and he had very little to do with 'Angel' other than its launch and a small handful of episodes. (The really good ones). I found beyond the Joss episodes and a few sparks here and there, that most of 'Angel' was of very middle-to-shit grade, and so -gasp- didn't waste my time with it. But that's TV in a nutshell.

    Firefly was different. You should see the DVD set before you judge. It's a real step up in terms of Whedon's growth as a creator; much more complex and refined than Buffy in many aspects. I found the most of it quite compelling and felt as though he was just getting rolling before the series was unfairly axed.

    As Joss was quoted as saying, "If the movie is a success, then maybe they'll give me my own series!" I hope this turns out to be the case. Films are far too small to give the kind of space required by a cast of such interesting character puzzles as those in Firefly.


    -FL

    [ Parent ]
  • by fmoody (148517) on Thursday March 04 2004, @04:23PM (#8468492)
    Tossing out for the moment comments about Whedon and whining about the fans of Firefly, your comments on the "issues" with the show are not all that on-target.


    One: We do not know the method they use for FTL. This makes it silly to complain about the energy needs that science as we know it would require. We don't have FTL science, it is something posited for the purposes of the show. For all we know, something developed a few years from now will show that a small application of enery under the correct circumstances will allow FTL. (No, I don't think it likely. But then again, look at the energy pay off with fusion and research into the quantum foam or whatever. Plenty we don't know yet...) Not the first time sci-fi has had FTL...


    Two: "Ancient" projectile weapons are still in use to this very day in many parts of the world even as engineering labs (and home hobby types) are turning out rail guns and electron beam/laser/Kill-O-Zap weapons. Technology is used when it solves problems, not when it is cool. (Okay, mostly not for the cool part.) You can buy modern blackpowder weapons (constructed with modern materials and methods but based on an old design with updates) to this very day. You seem to be hip to complain about energy demands, happen to recall the issue with packing energy weapons? Oh yeah, all the batteries. Rail gun? Recoil & power...


    Three: I could be mistaken, but the reason for moving the cattle was stolen right from history... They were bringing new blood in for a herd. Could they have carried frozen fertilized eggs instead? That would require facilities on the target planet which (again IIRC) was pretty early agrarian.


    All is not rosy with the realism aspect... But it is far less horrific a treatment of reality than you suggest.

    [ Parent ]
  • 29 replies beneath your current threshold.