Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Sci-Fi

Joss Whedon's Firefly Coming To The Big Screen 572

lhouk281 writes "According to this article in the Hollywood Reporter, Universal is turning Firefly into a movie. Firefly lives!" This show deserved a chance to run a full season. If this comes out, I'll sure be there opening weekend.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Joss Whedon's Firefly Coming To The Big Screen

Comments Filter:
  • by panda ( 10044 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:07PM (#6871593) Homepage Journal
    So, we like he MPAA and its members today?

    • Re:It's Thursday.... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by 91degrees ( 207121 )
      Not quite. We have a split personality over the matter - Some people like the MPAA, some people hate them, and some people hate them, but like a lot of the stuff they produce.

      I'm in the third category. The MPAA does some pretty nasty stuff, but I do like what they produce. I want to encourage them to continue making these things whilst discouraging them from trying to take away my rights.
    • by Anonymous Coward
      Nope. I'm going to display civil disobedience by commiting an act of copyright infringement.
    • JW + copyright (Score:5, Interesting)

      by arpy ( 587497 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @05:06PM (#6873159) Journal
      I wouldn't be so sure about Joss Whedon's attitude to copyright/file sharing issues and MPAA scum.

      For example: "If there's one thing the Buffy Powers That Be should have learned by now, it's that you can't stifle demand by choking the supply. When The WB pulled 'Graduation Day, Part 2' off the air in June, 1999, because of Columbine, fans got bootleg tapes from Canada (with creator Joss Whedon's blessing, no less)" (From here [snout.org])

      I.e. Joss Whedon actually sanctioned copyright violation by fans in at least one case (admittedly there were exceptional circumstances).

  • GREAT NEWS! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bandy ( 99800 ) <andrew.beals+slashdot@gmail.com> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:07PM (#6871599) Homepage Journal
    Firefly is a prime example of how Fox is populated by PHBs. Fabulous show, great concept .. and they show the episodes out of order and at random intervals so the audience just can't get into it. They could have capitalized on Farscape's cancellation [SciFi: A channel for SF fans run by PHBs], but nooooooooo!
    • by Trigun ( 685027 ) <evilNO@SPAMevilempire.ath.cx> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:10PM (#6871641)
      Maybe it will be so good it will spawn a T.V. Series.

      Oh wait....

    • Should've been an anime, then. I swear, these days, a successful anime DVD set will make more profit than any sci-fi that the American networks can whip up.
    • Re:GREAT NEWS! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by dasmegabyte ( 267018 ) <das@OHNOWHATSTHISdasmegabyte.org> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:51PM (#6872131) Homepage Journal
      I would like to point out that, as I see it, the only network on the planet that is properly marketting itself to an audience of nerds is Cartoon Network. Adult Swim is such a great idea, and it's run in such a refreshingly honest manner that I sometimes catch myself watching stuff I don't even like *cough* Inuyasha *cough* *cough*.

      Realize to a lot of people, we're just people with money. They couldn't care less about our culture or lifestyle, so long as we watch their dumb tv shows. They come up with an idea for a market segment, one they aren't a part of, and appeal to the stereotype, not real people. This is how you can have a channel like G4, and have it be a colossal failure. Earth to MBA: gamers already know the Konami code. They don't need a team of fresh faced multiethnic twentysomethings on a stage somewhere screaming it at them. But they might watch a show with in depth strategies from experts, interviews with developers and reviews that weren't paid off...

      Of course, this is nothing new. Lifetime, MTV, VH1, even BET, have all made their niche appealing to the LCD of their particular market. Which makes me wonder what Williams' Street has done to be given the freedom to do something new and interesting...
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:30PM (#6872661)
      but PHB's are only growing in number. Key decision making positions are increasingly placing brain dead (or just simply unqualified for that role) personnel into those positions and doing NOTHING to encourage good "business sense" decisions. As a consumer it is often annoying and frustrating.

      As an investor it is HIGHLY infuriating. (you can include "as an employee" here as well) As I mentioned in a post above... your dollar is your vote. Remember that when you get pissed at the stupidity you witness in business ask yourself if you helped create it.

      Oh, and one thing... don't confuse (or let yourself be confused by those who say this) the situation of being angry at a particular programming choice and that of obviously making a bad business decision. I have often been on the receiving end of decisions that were not favorable to me... however it was clear after a bit of thought and observation that I was in the minority. The real issue is when you have your major money maker and cancel it or as mentioned you take ANY show and simply mangle it so that you drive away revenue.

      Remember this bit of wisdom by Scott Adams, "Why are stupid managers there? Because they were themselves hired by stupid management" Until you break the chain then this will not magically go away. There is little incentive for managers with business sense. The drive is for buzz and other superficial element compliance. Yet here we have the problem of perceived causal relationships. If a PHB is around and money flows then his PHB will see it as a sign of good management. Trends and actual cause and effect analysis will be ignored.

      Personally this failure to do the job of an executive would lead me to fire them. I am glad I am a small company with no bloat. If anyone I outsourced to pulled this crap they would immediately be without money from me.

  • Oooh! Oooh! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Veldcath ( 591080 )
    I only got to see two episodes of Firefly. Pity, I did enjoy it. It just wasn't on at a time when I could remember to sit down and watch it, and I still have to build a linux PVR... so it got missed.

    How many episodes were made, anyhow? It really was a rather entertaining little show. Perhaps a bit too geek-targeted in some ways for the majority of society, but certainly fun.
    • you know, I tried to get into the show, and the concept was not bad, but just something about it didn't jive with me. Maybe there just weren't enough episodes made to get me into the plot, like other shows do, like Smallville (because the Superman mythos is fun), Buffy (now over), Angel, and Enterprise (hopefully more so starting next week).

      Or maybe the plot arch didn't strike me as terribly interesting... something about one of the crew's sister being messed with by some Earth-based company (or governmen
  • About time (Score:5, Interesting)

    by ericdano ( 113424 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:09PM (#6871628) Homepage
    About time damn it. This show should have been on another network. Fox is more interested in its lame reality TV shows than some interesting Sci-fi.

    Anyone know when the first "season" is coming out on DVD?

    • Re:About time (Score:2, Informative)

      by ceri ( 161894 )
      > Anyone know when the first "season" is coming out on DVD?

      Since I RTFA [hollywoodreporter.com], I saw that:

      > Three shows never aired on Fox but will likely be featured on the series' DVD release, due out in December.

      Ceri
    • Anyone know when the first "season" is coming out on DVD?

      December apparently. Of course you'd know this if you read the article :-)
    • That's because.... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by DesScorp ( 410532 ) <DesScorp AT Gmail DOT com> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:36PM (#6871960) Homepage Journal
      ...Fox's "Lame Reality Shows" are:

      A- VERY cheap to produce, and...
      B- Get VERY high ratings.

      Those two things add up to huge profit for Fox. Sci-Fi is, by its nature, expensive to produce, with a fairly limited audience. Fox is there to make money, not make an artistic statement. They're less pretentious than the other networks in that regard. And major networks don't view sci-fi seriously or artistically anyway. The original Star Trek only got on the air because NBC and Desilu thought they were getting a laser shoot-em-up, or as Gene Roddenberry put it, "Wagontrain in Space".

      Sci-Fi will always be a harder sell than "normal" dramas or reality tv because of the expense. Rendering technology has made it cheaper, but it's still a long ways off from being cost competitive. It's just easier and cheaper to produce another "When Rabid Ferrets Attack" or "The Gay Show".
  • Can we push for lower ticket prices or lower costs to own a DVD?

    Or is downloading movies off the internet not a big enough issue yet?
    • are you kidding? DVD purchases for MANY movies are under $15 with a CRAZY number of movies available for under $10...

      Lower ticket prices are not going to happen. There are other costs that are required when watching a movie in a PHYSICAL location. Employees, heat/AC, electricity, new fangled sound/effects, etc.

      DVDs are already on a fast release schedule to try and beat out piracy (rumors but seemingly true). The pirates OTOH just keep finding better ways to copy the DVDs!
    • Re:Universal (Score:5, Insightful)

      by RobotRunAmok ( 595286 ) * on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:15PM (#6871695)
      lower costs to own a DVD?

      Are you kidding? With the exception of video games, DVDs represnt the best value in entertainment. What would *you* call a fair price to own a DVD?
      • Are you kidding? x2

        I feel the current price is very fair, obviously some people don't though. Take a look on Kazaa, most major movies are ripped to a very watchable divx file. Either these are used precisely as backup copies or people feel that the current price is too much, so they pirate it just like music.

        I honestly have quite the DVD collection, I was just curious if the trend is going to follow music.
        • A bit OT, but hey:

          Yeah, I've watched some of those - mainly some TV episode stuff to fill in the blanks I missed during the regular season, but I also had a few full-length movies in DivX that I also have on DVD. The quality is not even close.

          Sure most movies *looks great* as DivX, but the sound quality sucks ass. The DVD, however, looks fantastic and sounds flawless. Now, nobody expects a DivX to sound flawless, but c'mon - I'd like to hear the friggin' dialogue, soundtrack, and special effects. Soun
        • You have it all wrong.

          First, people might believe that $14.44 at Target is a great price for a DVD and will purchase a title or two at that price. Usually something that they feel is REALLY worth paying for (I have purchased the following DVDs recently: Family Guy Season 1 (yes, I also have downloaded all the episodes as well), Rush, and Ghostbusters)

          Now, when I hop on Kazaa or www.suprnova.org and find a nice movie that's available for FREE why wouldn't I download it? The producers of DVDs cannot comp
  • The article: (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dreadlord ( 671979 )
    'Firefly' lands in film afterlife

    Joss Whedon
    By Zorianna Kit and Chris Gardner
    The short-lived TV series "Firefly" is moving to the big screen. After taking his "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" feature film and turning it into a successful TV series, Joss Whedon is about to do the reverse with another one of his creations. Whedon has teamed with Universal Pictures to turn "Firefly," a TV cult favorite, into a feature film.

    In addition to having adapted it for the big screen, Whedon will also make his feature direc
    • Whedon is producing the film through his Mutant Enemy Inc. along with studio-based producer Barry Mendell. Mendell, a former agent at UTA, used to represent Whedon. Mutant Enemy president Christopher Buchanan is executive producing. Universal production president Mary Parent is shepherding the project.
      I read it and re-read it. Are you sure there's not TrollText subtitution going on here somewhere?

      --
  • A full season? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rinikusu ( 28164 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:11PM (#6871659)
    My god, man. If "Everybody Loves Raymond" (lies! The title is a LIE! I hate that fucking show) can go on for how long now?, then Firefly deserves a run at least as long as Buffy.

    But, what do you expect? Great show, great premise, nice twist on typical plotlines, great writing, great "settings", great girls er actors and actresses.. It had all the recipes to be axed.

    "Hey, this show is too good. Gotta give it the axe."

    Remember, America doesn't want quality. We want convenience and entertainment that doesn't require thinking. Hence, Jackass.
    • Re:A full season? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Rude Turnip ( 49495 )
      Maybe you should get some fans together and petition a premium channel like HBO or Showtime to pick it up. Most of the series on those channels wouldn't last long on commercial "mainstream" (ie ignorant masses) TV, but they're perfect for smaller audiences willing to pay for quality.
  • length of run (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frostalicious ( 657235 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:13PM (#6871676) Journal
    This show deserved a chance to run a full season.

    A full season? Don't be too generous now. Most good shows don't start to click until at least the 2nd season. Try watching first season next generation, or Seinfeld. It's so wooden it looks like the actors have underwear 3 sizes too small. I liked Firefly, but even if the network didn't, they should give it at least a couple of seasons to bring in some numbers. Even Enterprise is dumping, and they haven't given up on it yet.
    • Most good shows don't start to click until at least the 2nd season. Try watching first season next generation

      However, don't watch Voyager or Enterprise during any season. Well...okay, watch Enterprise (that's the show that takes place before the old show, yet has better technology) during the ob-erotic "slather this goop on my semi-nekked Vulcan body" scenes if you must.

    • Re:length of run (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Khomar ( 529552 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:38PM (#6871981) Journal

      Most good shows don't start to click until at least the 2nd season.

      That was one of the more intriguing bits about the series for me -- the characters were already very good. The actors really seemed to be enjoying the show and doing a great job of breathing life into their characters. It was well written, and the plots were engaging. The big plot was just getting started when FOX cut them... even with the movie, we may never know where the show would have taken us.

      I am very happy to hear that they are at least going to try to get the entire cast on board. It was the full ensemble that really made the show work.

  • After taking his "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" feature film and turning it into a successful TV series, Joss Whedon is about to do the reverse with another one of his creations.

    So, after giving his Firefly TV series and turning it into an unsuccessful feature film, Joss Whedon is about to do the same with another one of his non-creations?

    Make any sense to anybody? These producers sure are a weird lot.

  • No one would watch the show when it was broadcast into the comfort of our living rooms for FREE. But yet we're going to run out and watch it at our local theater after paying high ticket prices.

    Heck, if it succeeds on the big screen, here's my vote for his next project: Flo the Motion Picture!

    • by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @04:42PM (#6872819) Homepage Journal
      No one would watch the show when it was broadcast into the comfort of our living rooms for FREE.

      I watched it, but...
      I was willing to:
      • stay at home on friday nights to watch it.
      • spend the ENTIRE night watching FOX on mute absentmindedly (while killing time on the net) until it came on at 12:05am to then stay up until 1:05am to watch it.
      • spend the ENTIRE night watching FOX on mute absentmindedly (while killing time on the net) until it came on at 12:20am to then stay up until 1:20am to watch it.
      • Live with the frustration and disapointment of staying at home to watch it on friday night only to discover that its crap like Andromeda or Happy Gilmour that is playing in its time slot that week (sometimes with advance warning, sometimes not).
      • Stick to the show after having been promised in all the commercials all summer long that the first ep. would be the pilot featuring a Girl In A Box only to be shown ep2 in its place, with no girl-ina-box (the (quite excellent) pilot was the LAST show aired...go figure).
      • Watch episodes in first run OUT OF ORDER, seeing the "previously on firefly" segement showing something that was only seen the week after (and that completely fucked up the story, seeing as how important stuff had happen in the episode that they had not shown, screwing the viewer quite thouroughly).
      • endure the ads for Fox's crappy other shows during the commercial breaks.
      • etc


      Most people aren't THAT dedicated to a completly new show.

      And BTW, not only were people watching the show when it was on for free, but we also TOPPED OFF THE PREORDER LIMIT for the DVD in one day. Jeez, think about it for one second will ya...
  • I won't be there (Score:5, Interesting)

    by macemoneta ( 154740 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:26PM (#6871842) Homepage
    I won't see this movie, because I was a fan of the series. I'm tied of being yanked around by the studios.

    Everytime I get interested in a program, it gets cancelled, usually without closure. Sometimes the cancellation occurs on a cliff-hanger, like "John Doe". That's a clear indication that the studios have no respect for the viewers; why should I have any respect for them? If they are not going to make a multi-year commitment, why should I?

    Firefly, FarScape, John Doe are all recent casualties. I'm pissed. I've decided to drop back, and wait for a few seasons before I start watching any new program. If it doesn't survive, then at least I wasn't impacted. If it's getting good buzz after a few seasons, then I'll watch the reruns or DVD to catch up.

    If this means that new shows won't get done, that's fine too. I'm old enough to know there are better things I should be spending my time on anyway (even /. qualifies in that regard). :-)

    • Not a good example (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ilsie ( 227381 )
      That's a clear indication that the studios have no respect for the viewers; why should I have any respect for them?

      Firefly the movie is being released by Universal, who bought the rights from Fox. So you can still not respect Fox and enjoy the Firefly movie.

      The only thing I'm worried about is whether or not Joss will have enough clout with the studio to make the movie HE wants, not the one that Universal wants. He has a track record of getting screwed over by Hollywood (albeit in the role of the write
    • I won't see this movie, because I was a fan of the series. I'm tied of being yanked around by the studios.

      Err, I think you're a bit confused. What do the [movie] studios have to do with television? Last I checked, TV shows are cancelled by the TV networks, and networks != studios. Now if this movie were being produced by Fox Studios, you'd have point; but as far as I can tell, that's not the case.

    • Wouldn't seeing the movie send the message to Fox (who, as others have mentioned, was responsible for cancelling the show and has no part in making the movie) that they lost a big time fan base, and therefore revenue stream, when they cancelled the show? I think it would send the message loudly and clearly that people want this sort of stuff.

      If they are not going to make a multi-year commitment, why should I?

      How is watching a TV show a multi-year commitment? I know how easy it is to get sucked in, but

  • They should put shows like this on the internet, and charge a buck to download and/or stream each episode. At least then, the show can control its own destiny, and the fans can watch it any way they want to.

    Hell, I'd pay a buck an episode for it, even if they left the commercials in.
    • Stephen King tried this. Charged a buck per chapter for a novel he was publishing online. Said he'd only continue if at least 75% of downloads were paid for.

      He never got past the second chapter.

      This is the internet. If it can be copied and distributed to a million of your closest friends, it will be, whether its wrong or not.

      In short, producers aren't stupid enough to try this. They know us better than that. And don't give me any crap about the Apple store being an example of paid downloads. Here's my ex
      • a) How many chapters was it going to be? He writes pretty hefty books. A buck a chapter may have ended up more than a hardcover. Definitely more than a softcover.

        b) How many people looked at a chapter out of the novelty, never intending to pay for it, or even look at the second chapter? I expect that would account for the bulk of the non-payers. The 75% was doomed to failure.

        c) I generally don't read King, but I heard that that book wasn't one of his best efforts.

        d) Who wants to wait for a wee
  • by Mal Reynolds ( 676267 ) <Michael_stev80@h ... .com minus berry> on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:33PM (#6871926)
    What amazingly good news. Woot! For any who've not yet seen it, be sure to pick up the DVD of the first (and only, grumble) season when it hits the shelves this December. The DVD *will* have the unaired episodes and lots of commentary and gag reels and all shown in the correct order (Fox sucks so bad it isn't funny). Amazon was pre-soldout last I checked. For any who don't know why Firefly didn't make it, one phrase should answer it "Fox are Idiots". The idiots at Fox preempted the show for sports programming more for over half of it's episodes. Then there was the 2-hour premiere which cost something like 6 million dollars. The premiere introduced all the characters and set the story. Fox execs decided they didn't want to show the premiere first, they wanted it to be the 10th episode of the season. and had to be reworked into a "flashback episode" for that context... What a bunch of wankers, but we all know that already. The article says Universal bought a rights transfer from Fox, perhaps they'll never again influence anything to do with it. One can only hope that when the movie is successful they'll give thought to bringing back the show. A movie is nice and all, and it's Great that Firefly is back. But a movie will only give us 2 hours of Firefly a year. Compared to the 15 or more hours a year of Firefly we'd have if the TV show comes back. More = better. WOOT
  • Bunk (Score:5, Funny)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:47PM (#6872083) Homepage Journal
    Great! Finally a reason to get out of my bunk! : )

    (You need to have seen the series to get this)
    P.S. Notice my .sig:
  • Schweet. Space Station (Canadian SciFiTV) is rerunning all Eps of Firefly this month. [spacecast.com]

    Listings [zap2it.com]

    Gotta get me one of those Blue Sun MindBlasters

  • by LeiGong ( 621856 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @03:56PM (#6872190) Homepage
    Along with the original cast, 3 new members will be added to lure in the casual movie goer. The first new addition will be a stubborn and mean-spirited, yet loveable, robot named "Alvin." The 2nd character will be a 1-2' tall furry creature with a really "cute" name that always seems to get into trouble. The 3rd character will be a "superior" alien-being that will constantly remind the crew of their mistakes and point out the foolish of 80% of the captain's actions. This will help the movie attract more than just the show's 16-35 male demographic audience.
  • by tekrat ( 242117 ) on Thursday September 04, 2003 @10:52PM (#6875746) Homepage Journal
    Whatever her name was. The engineer of the ship, the cute blonde with a wrench in her hands and slightly greasy face, she was crazy cute! Keep her for the movie! I'd watch two hours of just her, thanks, you don't even need the rest of the crew, although the crazy sister character was pretty interesting, and the fact that the pilot and first officer were married.

    Actually, now that I think about it, the whole show was rather good, well cast, good acting, decent plots, and some very witty dialogue.

    Overall, a pretty decent show. Where do I go to order that DVD again?

    Anyhow, the mechanic chick was really cute, did I say that?

    Firefly ruelezzz....

"Trust me. I know what I'm doing." -- Sledge Hammer

Working...