Page 2 of 3

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:02 pm
by MasterWhedon
Theta wrote:...and especially in light of the fact that Universal marketing proved just how much they suck (hence the lackluster B.O. can be blamed on the marketing and NOT the film)...

Don't play that game. Whedon himself has stated on several occasions that blame for Serenity's "failure" should not rely solely on the Universal marketing department. Serenity was a tough sell to the uninitiated, a fact Joss openly admitted from the beginning. Universal was unable to make it an easy sell, but that's because they weren't given an easy movie.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 7:54 pm
by Theta
MasterWhedon wrote:
Theta wrote:...and especially in light of the fact that Universal marketing proved just how much they suck (hence the lackluster B.O. can be blamed on the marketing and NOT the film)...

Don't play that game.


I play that game because it's not just "Serenity" that got burned. Basically, this year was a race between Universal and Sony to see who could commit the more spectacular suicide.

Why did "Land of the Dead" get released in June, a week before "War of the Worlds", which (since they made it) they KNEW was going to be pulling in the audience everywhere, instead of over Halloween? "Saw II" might have tanked if it'd had competition at all. "The Producers" they opened with zero marketing expecting it to clean house in the awards, which it didn't. "Doom" they opened in mid-October expecting an action movie to sell to crowds looking for horror movies. "King Kong" they opened at Christmas when they should have made it a summer tentpole.

And how, for the love of God HOW, do you take a movie with multiple Oscar nominations, directed by STEVEN SPIELBERG, and kill it? There is no reason whatsoever "Munich" should be tanking: it's got a huge name, great reviews, and awards nods. But tanking it is.

So far, their one real achievement is "Brokeback Mountain", which is going to make them pots of money and win Oscars. Not bad for a movie about Dumbledore men, not traditionally a high-grossing genre. But, in a brilliant stroke, they marketed it to women. Otherwise, it's been a shitty year for them.

In the case of "Serenity", it should have been released in August. They should have assumed that the fan base was sewn up and focused on people who didn't know the show. It should have not been sold (as much as it pains me to say this) as a Joss Whedon movie because Joss Whedon is not a known name to most of middle America. Basically, they should have sold it as "hey, come for the action and funny!" not, "Hey, come to see these characters you love even though you never...watched...the show at all."

In short, the Uni marketing department needs a shakeup. Marc Shmugers has proven he can't do his job. Fire him and get somebody else. Hell, get Joss Whedon. Then at least the ad copy would be well written.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:01 pm
by TonyWilson
Wasn't the fact that Serenity had sneak previews all over the country for 6 months before it was released officially a major factor in it's poor B.O?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:24 pm
by RogerRab
Remember, Universal spent $10 promoting the $40 movie. Usually the promotion matches, or is close to, the budget.

So that $30 million they saved on promotion would have helped get a bigger cinema showing for this thing.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:25 pm
by RogerRab
TonyWilson wrote:Wasn't the fact that Serenity had sneak previews all over the country for 6 months before it was released officially a major factor in it's poor B.O?


Not at all. It just helped build word of mouth, mainly online, mainly to a sci-fi crowd who would have watched it anyway.

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:35 pm
by RogerRab
Gheorghe Zamfir wrote:Watching the outtakes, every now and then after a screw up the cast will yell "Summer!" I figure that's some inside cast humor, was wondering if anyone knew the story though?


You're lucky: here's the scoop.

In the second half of the big 4 minute opening tracking shot across Serenity, we go from Simon, to Mal, to Kaylee, and finally the shot ends with River, and all she has to do is lie there. When filming it, everything went right...until Summer Glau messed up her bit because she broke into giggles, and everyone was like "Summer!!!". This happened twice I think, she couldn't get her ending part right. And both times she messed up, the whole cast was like 'Summer!".

Then they shot the scene again, and Nathon Fillion messed up, and he shouted "Summer!". After that it just became an in-joke in the cast, and everytime someone messed up, they would blame Summer Glau and shout Summer - even if she wasn't on set!


Ah, you know you're a Browncoat when you know the backstory behind injokes amongst the cast during the making of the movie...

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:40 pm
by Eric G
I watched this again last night. First bit of Whedon material I have seen since I turned on Buffy all those years ago and turned it right back off again.

And while I think that the world was ready for another Sci Fi adventure, I think they needed a much bigger production budget to lure in more than just the Firefly fans, as I'm sure not many others went to see this flick....which is s shame because I would have liked to see another one.
What happen?!
Wasn't it the uproar of the net fans that got Firefly/Serenity up onto the big screen? What exactly happened?!?

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:55 pm
by Gheorghe Zamfir
Wow, thanks Roger! I had just resigned myself to never knowing what the story was, but now I know and that small itch of curiousity has been scratched :D

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:08 pm
by RogueScribner
RogerRab wrote:Here’s some figures and number crunching for anyone who’s interested:

Serenity costs $39 million to make ($1 million under it’s $40 million budget) and while the advertising budget was never made public, people have estimated around $10 million. So overall the movie costs around $49 million for Universal to make. Now Serenity made a disappointing $25 million domestically and $13 million internationally for a total of $38 million at the box office. Now following the 55% rule, where studios get around 55% of the total of the box office, Universal only made $21 million from the box office.


So far, this sounds about right.

RogerRab wrote:Now there’s been no official sales figures for Serenity since it’s been released on DVD, only where it’s ranked on the sales charts. However, there have been sales announcements for other DVD’s above and bellow Serenity and people have managed to do some number crunching and worked out that Serenity sold from 1.104 to 1.605 million copies in the first week of release!


Perhaps.

RogerRab wrote:Some more number crunching was done to figure out Serenity sold around 825 thousand copies for January 2006. So by now it’s definitely over 2 million (possibly high as 2.5 million). Now studios generally take around $12 dollars profit per DVD, with the remaining split between the retailer and distributer. So that’s $24 million from the DVD sales, already more than the studio made from the box office. Meanwhile VideoBusiness.com tracked Serenity in bringing in over $9 million in DVD rentals. It has since fallen off the chart, but at the rate of it’s decline it’s safe to estimate that it manage to make $10 million before dropping too far.


This is where it loses me. I can see diehards buying the DVD in week 1 and spiking sales a bit. But to have less than a 25% drop the following week? The movie would have killed with those numbers! But that isn't the biggest deal to me. Sure, it's possible. It had a few good weeks before dropping off the Top 20 charts. But does Universal really see any money off of rentals? The chains buy their copies and that's the extent of the transaction, isn't it? Maybe I'm ignorant in this regard, but I didn't realize a popular DVD rental could make the studio money. At any rate, I doubt Serenity is going to sell more than perhaps 3 million DVDs over the course of the next few years. Most people I've spoken to haven't even heard of the movie.

RogerRab wrote:Now the tv rights for Serenity were sold to NBC for a 3 movie package deal for $26 million. Now Serenity was hardly the top movie in the deal, so let’s low ball it and say Serenity only gets $5 million out of that deal.

So that’s $21 million from the box office, $24 million from DVD sales, $10 million from rentals, and around $5 million from tv rights for a total of $60 million. With Serenity costing $49 million to make and advertise it’s estimated that Universal has made $11 million off of the movie. Not nearly enough for Universal to invest in another movie, but there’s still profit to be made. The DVD has yet been released internationally and if the domestic sales are any indication, the DVD will make more money than the theatre box office. Especially since Universal International has included a lot of cool extras in the various international editions, the Australian version has a second disk of extras and comes in a cool metal tin, plus one retailer is offering free posters with the movie, another retailer offering Serenity mouse-mats and all sorts of other cool stuff. Meanwhile the DVD has sold well enough for the talked about Special Edition to be made available. The extras have already been produced for the Australian edition and ready to go, the only extra thing that Joss Whedon wants to do is add full cast audio commentary.

Meanwhile those calculations didn’t include anything from licensing which has been doing really well. The comic book, movie novelization, books, official t-shirts, RPG have all sold better than expected and more of all these items are on it’s way. There’s more money to be made out of this franchise yet and a sequel or possibily even a direct-to-DVD sequel might still yet happen."


Finally we've got some officialish news on how well Serenity has done. In terms of sequel likelihood, we've gotta remember that now Serenity is a brand name and it's associated with a quality movie (yes, really), and it's userbase is bigger now. Firefly is STILL (about 4 years on) in the Top 20 DVDs list at Amazon, and, surely, this can't be all we'll have. You can't take the sequel from us.


I'm glad that it looks as if Universal isn't going to lose money on the deal, and maybe even make a little something off of it. But the bottom line is that Serenity/Firefly is niche. It always has been and it always will be. This isn't another Star Wars or Star Trek where there are millions of people in this country and abroad going crazy over this property and demanding more, more, MORE!!! It's a mild number, at best. Another television series would probably have the same number of viewers as it did the first time around (it had an average 3.0 rating, or 3.1 million viewers). Comparatively, Enterprise averaged a little less than 3 million viewers in its final season and was cancelled. Firefly has a steady and vocal fan base, but they simply aren't large enough in number to warrant anything outside of cult treatment of this property. So we may get some comic books and trade novels, some t-shirts, and maybe even an RPG. Who knows? I think in the end, we'll be lucky to see a TV movie. As far as I can tell, the live action component of this franchise is dead. There will never be another movie. Fox has no interest in another series. Direct-to-DVD is a pipe dream.

People need to learn to let go. Enjoy what comes (if anything), but stop clinging to these sales numbers like they will actually mean anything. There will be no Big Damn Sequel! There will be no new life on TV! It's OVER!!! Deal with it.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 7:31 am
by Rothgar
A true Browncoat would never give up so easily.

When Firefly was cancelled after 11 episodes, did WE give up? Fuck no, we fought, and we fought, and we promoted and promoted and promoted the DVD until it got some really impressive sales.

Then Joss came in, and did he give up? No, he fought, and he fought, and in the end he managed to get $40 million from Universal to make the rootinest, tootinest, big damn movie we ever saw.

FROM A FAILED, CULT, SCI-FI TV SHOW, WITH NO BIG ACTORS, OR HIGH CONCEPT STORYLINE.

If you're giving up the good fight so easily, you should think about joining the Alliance, traitor.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:48 am
by havocSchultz
Rothgar wrote:A true Browncoat would never give up so easily.

When Firefly was cancelled after 11 episodes, did WE give up? Fuck no, we fought, and we fought, and we promoted and promoted and promoted the DVD until it got some really impressive sales.

Then Joss came in, and did he give up? No, he fought, and he fought, and in the end he managed to get $40 million from Universal to make the rootinest, tootinest, big damn movie we ever saw.

FROM A FAILED, CULT, SCI-FI TV SHOW, WITH NO BIG ACTORS, OR HIGH CONCEPT STORYLINE.

If you're giving up the good fight so easily, you should think about joining the Alliance, traitor.


a true browncoat wouldn't be this diplomatic...

it was a good movie - not great - not horrible - but enjoyable - and i think the fact that they had 6 months of sneaks did hurt it a bit - seeing as how all the browncoats got to see it numerous times for free - then - when it was released - they probably didn't see it in theatres as many times as they should;ve... let me ask you ask you something - how many times did you see serenity in theatres - and how many times did you pay to see it...?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:05 am
by Peven
as rabid as the browncoats can be, i wonder if they didn't put off as many people from seeing Serenity as they might have convinced to see it.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 10:10 am
by havocSchultz
Peven wrote:as rabid as the browncoats can be, i wonder if they didn't put off as many people from seeing Serenity as they might have convinced to see it.


oh - i wouldn't doubt it - when a bunch of (possibly) crazy folk tell you to watch a movie that will (and/or better) change your life (or else) it is a little dis-heartening... too much hype will always scare people off - no matter how good the product is - people don't like to be told that something is the best ever over and over and over - and that if they don't think so - then they know nothing - i saw it in theatres - and i never watched firefly (i think i was busy the day it aired... :wink: ) - but i had heard great things about the them song... 8) but it looked cool - i am a whedon fan (not crazy like - but i've enjoyed pretty much everything that i've seen of his and i think he is talented and has a fresh unique voice/vision) - and the girlfriend knew nothing about it - but she is a sci-fi fan - we liked it - it got better and better as the movie progressed - but in no way was it the 2nd coming of sci-fi - and it didn't make it into my best of the year - but i won't bad mouth the film - cause it was well done - especially with the size of it's budget... i just can't wait for Wonder Woman and all this to (quite possibly) start up again...

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:43 pm
by RogueScribner
Rothgar wrote:A true Browncoat would never give up so easily.

When Firefly was cancelled after 11 episodes, did WE give up? Fuck no, we fought, and we fought, and we promoted and promoted and promoted the DVD until it got some really impressive sales.

Then Joss came in, and did he give up? No, he fought, and he fought, and in the end he managed to get $40 million from Universal to make the rootinest, tootinest, big damn movie we ever saw.

FROM A FAILED, CULT, SCI-FI TV SHOW, WITH NO BIG ACTORS, OR HIGH CONCEPT STORYLINE.

If you're giving up the good fight so easily, you should think about joining the Alliance, traitor.


The whole crux of your argument is that Firefly never had a chance to spread its wings and everyone wanted it to have another shot, Joss included. It had its second chance. And it didn't do as well as hoped. Who are you going to blame this time? Fox? Universal? Joss? The ignorant masses? I honestly wish the show survived its first season. But it didn't. I was elated when the impossible was announced: a feature film. But it ended up being a fairly well-reviewed blip on the box office radar. At what point to do you accept reality and be happy with what you've been given?

The movie wraps up what the series started, so at least we have a whole arc to cling to. Everything else is the stuff of tradepaperbacks and fan fiction. If we're REALLY lucky, we'll get a Sci-Fi TV movie down the road, like the Dungeons & Dragons sequel. There will NEVER be another TV series (neither the original series nor the movie did well enough to warrant that) and there will NEVER be another movie (the economics simply don't support it).

The impossible was already achieved. How much more dreaming am I required to do? Even Joss seems resigned to Firefly's fate. At some point, you simply have to let go. It's not because you love it any less, but more because otherwise you're leaving yourself open to heartcrushing disappointment. I'm happy with I've got. If more on the Firefly front arrives, I'll be happy to take a gander at that as well. But I'm not exactly holding my breath.

havocSchultz wrote: let me ask you ask you something - how many times did you see serenity in theatres - and how many times did you pay to see it...?


I saw Serenity 4 times in the theaters, and I paid all 4 times. Those sneaks weren't free, you know. Regardless, I only attended one of them. I don't think the concept of the sneaks was bad so much as the duration of them. If they were all held in July/August ramping up to the premiere of the film, that may have worked more to Universal's advantage, but they started holding sneaks in May. There's just no way to keep the momentum of word-of-mouth and other pre-advertising ventures going that long.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:57 pm
by MasterWhedon
havocSchultz wrote:a true browncoat wouldn't be this diplomatic...

LOLZORS!!

We need more Rational Browncoats. I shall be their leader.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:59 pm
by thomasgaffney
MasterWhedon wrote:Rational Browncoats


Isn't that an oxymoron?

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:01 pm
by RogueScribner
You know, I like to consider myself a hardcore Whedon fan, but I have to admit some of the Browncoats I've encountered gave me pause. I'm all for being passionate for what you like, but some of them act like they're on a mission from god to spread his word and convert the world to his religion! In the end, it's just a TV show and a movie. Chill.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:07 pm
by MasterWhedon
thomasgaffney wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Rational Browncoats


Isn't that an oxymoron?

Your face is an oxymoron.

LOOKOUT BEHIND YOU!!

THERE'S SNAKES!! ON THE MOTHERFUCKIN' FIREFLY-CLASS VESSEL!!

SNAKES!!

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:12 pm
by thomasgaffney
MasterWhedon wrote:
thomasgaffney wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Rational Browncoats


Isn't that an oxymoron?

Your face is an oxymoron.

LOOKOUT BEHIND YOU!!

THERE'S SNAKES!! ON THE MOTHERFUCKIN' FIREFLY-CLASS VESSEL!!

SNAKES!!


MW, you put the MORON in oxymoron. Hm, snakes on a Firefly class. If I could just get a clip off Sam Jackson putting Jayne's hat on.....

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:28 pm
by MasterWhedon
thomasgaffney wrote:MW, you put the MORON in oxymoron. Hm, snakes on a Firefly class. If I could just get a clip off Sam Jackson putting Jayne's hat on.....

We need to have something past Toshiro to strive for 'cause THAT would be a picture worth seeing.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:53 pm
by Theta
TonyWilson wrote:Wasn't the fact that Serenity had sneak previews all over the country for 6 months before it was released officially a major factor in it's poor B.O?


Nah, the fans all bought tickets and then went to go see it opening weekend. I know, I was there for the May Boston screening, behind some British kid who'd memorized so much pointless Firefly trivia you wanted to get him some booze and a hooker.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:57 pm
by Theta
thomasgaffney wrote:
MasterWhedon wrote:Rational Browncoats


Isn't that an oxymoron?


<rant; not directed at ThomasGaffney, just in general>
The whaling on "Firefly" fans really pisses me off. I was here when this entire site balkanized over Episode I, and now much of the same people who were threatening to shit on my mother after they raped her (exact quote) because I thought Episode I was one of the worst movies of the 90s are saying Browncoats are irrational, annoying dickheads. I got viruses in my inbox for hating Episode I. I refuse to accept Browncoats are worse, or even annoying, when held to that standard.

</rant>

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 8:58 pm
by RogueScribner
Theta wrote:
TonyWilson wrote:Wasn't the fact that Serenity had sneak previews all over the country for 6 months before it was released officially a major factor in it's poor B.O?


Nah, the fans all bought tickets and then went to go see it opening weekend. I know, I was there for the May Boston screening, behind some British kid who'd memorized so much pointless Firefly trivia you wanted to get him some booze and a hooker.


Yeah, I'm pretty sure everyone who attended a screening saw the movie at least one additional time after it opened nationally. It had a healthy first weekend. It was the second and third weekends that weren't so hot.

PostPosted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 9:00 pm
by MasterWhedon
Theta wrote:<rant; not directed at ThomasGaffney, just in general>
The whaling on "Firefly" fans really pisses me off. I was here when this entire site balkanized over Episode I, and now much of the same people who were threatening to shit on my mother after they raped her (exact quote) because I thought Episode I was one of the worst movies of the 90s are saying Browncoats are irrational, annoying dickheads. I got viruses in my inbox for hating Episode I. I refuse to accept Browncoats are worse, or even annoying, when held to that standard.

</rant>

Thing is, many of the crazy Browncoats used to be the crazy Star Wars folk. That T-Shirt "Joss Whedon is My Master Now" doesn't sell like hot cakes for nothing.

PostPosted: Wed Feb 22, 2006 6:25 pm
by Theta
MasterWhedon wrote:Thing is, many of the crazy Browncoats used to be the crazy Star Wars folk. That T-Shirt "Joss Whedon is My Master Now" doesn't sell like hot cakes for nothing.


I thought it was mostly bitter fans alienated by the first two prequels (a category I fall into.)

Frankly, I've met some crazy Browncoats and even mid-level Star Wars fans just leave them in the dust. It makes me livid that a good movie was held to such hypocritical standards.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:42 pm
by The Vicar
I still don't understand this polarization - some people seem capable of only backing one horse. I enjoyed the first run of Star Wars - thought the second edition was sub-par with the possible exception of the last. I enjoyed Serenity far more than any of the second edition SWs films, and yet don't feel a need to get into someone's face about it. Sci-Fi films, good ones, are a rare & savory treat - way can't they all be loved and accepted and BACKED so that we might see more? Fans of SWs falling on Firefly/Serenity fans, & vice versa, makes no goddamn sense.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:49 pm
by havocSchultz
The Vicar wrote:I still don't understand this polarization - some people seem capable of only backing one horse. I enjoyed the first run of Star Wars - thought the second edition was sub-par with the possible exception of the last. I enjoyed Serenity far more than any of the second edition SWs films, and yet don't feel a need to get into someone's face about it. Sci-Fi films, good ones, are a rare & savory treat - way can't they all be loved and accepted and BACKED so that we might see more? Fans of SWs falling on Firefly/Serenity fans, & vice versa, makes no goddamn sense.


ya! cause everybody knows that STAR TREK PWNS them both!!!!!!!!!


:wink:

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:56 pm
by The Vicar
havocSchultz wrote:
The Vicar wrote:I still don't understand this polarization - some people seem capable of only backing one horse. I enjoyed the first run of Star Wars - thought the second edition was sub-par with the possible exception of the last. I enjoyed Serenity far more than any of the second edition SWs films, and yet don't feel a need to get into someone's face about it. Sci-Fi films, good ones, are a rare & savory treat - way can't they all be loved and accepted and BACKED so that we might see more? Fans of SWs falling on Firefly/Serenity fans, & vice versa, makes no goddamn sense.


ya! cause everybody knows that STAR TREK PWNS them both!!!!!!!!!


:wink:


Havoc, you are a naughty, naughty man.

Being right doesn't make you....right. Oh sod it.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 1:06 pm
by Peven
the hardcore browncoats can be every bit as miopic and cultish in their allegiance to all things Whedon as the SW apologists are to Lucas. both groups take themselves and their objects of idolization too seriously, and can take the fun out of being a sci/fi movie fan for those who come in contact with them. i enjoy both Firefly/Serenity and SW, but take them for what they are; pulp sci-fi. the cottom candy of the movie universe, right?

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:32 pm
by RogueScribner
Whedon's stuff can be silly at times, but I don't know if I'd go far as to label it "cotton candy of the movie universe." Whedon's stuff almost always had a deeper thematic element to the main action on screen and he strives to create real and interesting characters who are above all else human, not Hollywood clichés. I can't really say the same thing for Star Wars, as much as I enjoy the series.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:46 pm
by Fievel
I love Star Wars (including Clone Wars toons and Christmas Special... but that's a special/forbidden love).
I love Firefly/Serenity.
I love your mom.

Why must geeks polarize on the two? At least most of us here can probably agree that the theme to Enterprise blew.

I just watched the movie when it came out on DVD. Then, last week I watched the series for the first time. I found the series to be a lot of fun. I remember flipping through it when it initially aired and thought that it looked cheap at the time.... it looks MUCH better than I remembered. The dialogue is great. Jayne Cobb's character (dialogue and acting) comes across like that of a dubbed Anime character of similar traits (big, dumb, etc.)... and I dig that.
Goof stuff.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:55 pm
by Peven
RogueScribner wrote:Whedon's stuff can be silly at times, but I don't know if I'd go far as to label it "cotton candy of the movie universe." Whedon's stuff almost always had a deeper thematic element to the main action on screen and he strives to create real and interesting characters who are above all else human, not Hollywood clichés. I can't really say the same thing for Star Wars, as much as I enjoy the series.


uh, a teenage chick vampire killer, a witch, demons, evil vampires turned good, space cowboys...........above all else human? seriously, what is more "human" about those premises than the SW characters and premises? how are vampires less hollywood cliche than jedi? ( i mean,to give Lucas credit, he invented jedi, while..... is there anything much more hollywood cliche than vampires or westerns(even one in space)?"

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:03 pm
by RogueScribner
Peven wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:Whedon's stuff can be silly at times, but I don't know if I'd go far as to label it "cotton candy of the movie universe." Whedon's stuff almost always had a deeper thematic element to the main action on screen and he strives to create real and interesting characters who are above all else human, not Hollywood clichés. I can't really say the same thing for Star Wars, as much as I enjoy the series.


uh, a teenage chick vampire killer, a witch, demons, evil vampires turned good, space cowboys...........above all else human? seriously, what is more "human" about those premises than the SW characters and premises? how are vampires less hollywood cliche than jedi? ( i mean,to give Lucas credit, he invented jedi, while..... is there anything much more hollywood cliche than vampires or westerns(even one in space)?"


Okay, anything can seem cliché ridden if you simply take it at face value. Did you forget the part where I mentioned the deeper thematic elements and how Whedon can take these normally stereotypical characters (ditzy cheerleader, slacker goofball, uptight englishman, snarky captain) and turn them into flesh and blood human beings? These characters had real motivations, real reactions, real desires, and they suffered like real people do. Whedon taps into that little something that we all have in common. Whedon is ALL about the characters. Lucas is more concerned with story than creating flesh and blood people to populate his galaxy far, far away. That's not a fault, but comparing Star Wars to Whedonverse type stuff is comparing apples to oranges. They are not the same thing.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:08 pm
by Peven
RogueScribner wrote:
Peven wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:Whedon's stuff can be silly at times, but I don't know if I'd go far as to label it "cotton candy of the movie universe." Whedon's stuff almost always had a deeper thematic element to the main action on screen and he strives to create real and interesting characters who are above all else human, not Hollywood clichés. I can't really say the same thing for Star Wars, as much as I enjoy the series.


uh, a teenage chick vampire killer, a witch, demons, evil vampires turned good, space cowboys...........above all else human? seriously, what is more "human" about those premises than the SW characters and premises? how are vampires less hollywood cliche than jedi? ( i mean,to give Lucas credit, he invented jedi, while..... is there anything much more hollywood cliche than vampires or westerns(even one in space)?"


Okay, anything can seem cliché ridden if you simply take it at face value. Did you forget the part where I mentioned the deeper thematic elements and how Whedon can take these normally stereotypical characters (ditzy cheerleader, slacker goofball, uptight englishman, snarky captain) and turn them into flesh and blood human beings? These characters had real motivations, real reactions, real desires, and they suffered like real people do. Whedon taps into that little something that we all have in common. Whedon is ALL about the characters. Lucas is more concerned with story than creating flesh and blood people to populate his galaxy far, far away. That's not a fault, but comparing Star Wars to Whedonverse type stuff is comparing apples to oranges. They are not the same thing.



apples and oranges to you, apples and apples to others. just different pov's i guess.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:16 pm
by The Vicar
Lets leave apples & oranges out of this
I'm getting hungry.

PostPosted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:03 pm
by MasterWhedon
RogueScribner wrote:
Peven wrote:
RogueScribner wrote:Whedon's stuff can be silly at times, but I don't know if I'd go far as to label it "cotton candy of the movie universe." Whedon's stuff almost always had a deeper thematic element to the main action on screen and he strives to create real and interesting characters who are above all else human, not Hollywood clichés. I can't really say the same thing for Star Wars, as much as I enjoy the series.


uh, a teenage chick vampire killer, a witch, demons, evil vampires turned good, space cowboys...........above all else human? seriously, what is more "human" about those premises than the SW characters and premises? how are vampires less hollywood cliche than jedi? ( i mean,to give Lucas credit, he invented jedi, while..... is there anything much more hollywood cliche than vampires or westerns(even one in space)?"


Okay, anything can seem cliché ridden if you simply take it at face value. Did you forget the part where I mentioned the deeper thematic elements and how Whedon can take these normally stereotypical characters (ditzy cheerleader, slacker goofball, uptight englishman, snarky captain) and turn them into flesh and blood human beings? These characters had real motivations, real reactions, real desires, and they suffered like real people do. Whedon taps into that little something that we all have in common. Whedon is ALL about the characters. Lucas is more concerned with story than creating flesh and blood people to populate his galaxy far, far away. That's not a fault, but comparing Star Wars to Whedonverse type stuff is comparing apples to oranges. They are not the same thing.

Rogue, I think that's very well argued.

I am also a HUGE Star Wars fan, but the characters in those series were never intended to be more than slightly-fleshed-out types. They're indellible characters, sure, but they're not nearly as complex as anything from any of the various Whedonverses.

Joss often starts with a genre "type", then twists and turns it into something new. He darkens light characters and lightens dark ones. He creates characters we believe have free will, not just those needed to further a plot.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:45 pm
by The Vicar
Thus Master Whedon;
"Rogue, I think that's very well argued.

I am also a HUGE Star Wars fan, but the characters in those series were never intended to be more than slightly-fleshed-out types. They're indellible characters, sure, but they're not nearly as complex as anything from any of the various Whedonverses.

Joss often starts with a genre "type", then twists and turns it into something new. He darkens light characters and lightens dark ones. He creates characters we believe have free will, not just those needed to further a plot."

There is a true sense of evolution to Joss's characters, a lengthy process of becoming...and the tranformations are realistic. Take Cordelia or Wesley....their character arcs took years and they were both certainly different people at the end.
But they never arrived there through some convenient contrivance or deus ex machina. It was a journey, as it is ( or should be) for everybody.

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:49 pm
by RogueScribner
True, true. Again, apples meet oranges. People like apples, people like oranges. It's fruitless to compare them to each other, however.



Like that? "Fruitless?" Hee!

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:51 pm
by The Vicar
Apples & oranges fruitless?

But yeah, its all down to tastes.

( damn that tiny printing.....)

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:52 pm
by The Vicar
Bad pun
You must be punished

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:57 pm
by Peven
thats only 2/3 of a pun.....P U

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:01 pm
by RogueScribner
I'm here all week! Try the veal!

PostPosted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 2:32 pm
by The Vicar
Who was that dumb ass who said " ...comedy is hard?"

PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2006 6:44 pm
by WillowFan
I don't know if anyone saw it, but on BBC4's Cinema Show just now, they had some professor discussing Serenity.

He kept on saying "its great, but it's not the greatest film ever made" - seriously about three times he said that. I think he was a Closet Browncoat. It's good to see that both the people discussing it mentioned how brilliant it was, btw.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 6:22 am
by AtomicHyperbole
It's not easy being a UK fan of Firefly. I went to go see Adam Baldwin give a talk last year at my very first (well, after my anime otaku teen years) convention, dressed up in my brown leather jacket and stetson. The man can sing, too - after gentlre prodding we got renditions of the Jaynestown song and title track!

Although much as I love Firefly, I preferred hearing his Stanley Kubrick stories...

Oh yeah. But, does being a Browncoat mean I'm a Joss Whedon fan? This seems to be a burning debate here.

Hardly.

I'm not.

He's just a talented scriptwriter. I work with scripts all the time, and I'm not a massive fan of scriptwriters either as they often tell too much, when they could be showing. In general (not talking about Joss here). I enjoyed Buffy for the fun trashiness it was, but it totally lost me as it got more serious.

However, my best mate, an editor, love Buffy. He has all the DVD's and so on. Criticise Buffy, you might as well be calling his Mum (that's Mom to you readers in the States) a studly slag.

I lent him Firefly.

He fell asleep.

He's got no interest in Serenity. He'll watch it, but he's certain it's not going to be his cup of tea.

Point is we're not WHEDON fans. We're fans of the concepts and the shows, but we know everything the man does isn't gold plated. We respect him for his career however - being bother television guppies swimming in the sea of freelance employment - but we know he's just a man. With a mighty nib.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:26 pm
by Theta
Of course not everything Joss Whedon does is gold-plated. The man himself said that on the way back from the premiere of "Alien Resurrection", his wife asked him "to say something funny, so I can remember that you are." Actually, he's self-depreciating in the extreme, and I think the fans somewhat overcompensate for that.

"Buffy", though, you should go back and watch. Part of the reason I love the show is the clever use of horror tropes to reflect actual problems in high school. And there's also "Hush", "The Body" and "Once More With Feeling", which are simply genius.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:41 pm
by Theta
havocSchultz wrote: seeing as how all the browncoats got to see it numerous times for free - then - when it was released - they probably didn't see it in theatres as many times as they should;ve... let me ask you ask you something - how many times did you see serenity in theatres - and how many times did you pay to see it...?


Me, I paid to see it twice. That May screening set me back ten bucks, man, and seeing it when it actually came out was actually cheaper. Then my fiancee got the DVD; all told we kicked in something like forty bucks.


As for Serenity's sequel prospects..."Austin Powers" didn't do very well in theaters; okay, but not great. However, it absolutely exploded on home video and that was the deciding factor in New Line making a sequel. In Uni-land, "Land of the Dead" basically ate shit theatrically, but it did so well in home video that the sequel to THAT has been approved (and hopefully it comes out over fucking Halloween weekend this year and beats the "Saw" franchise to death with its gigantic zombified cock.)

Let's not forget part of the reason "Serenity" itself was launched was the fact that those TV boxed sets sold an eyebrow-raising six figures...a number that has only gone up since the movie came out. It remains a very popular seller on Amazon.com. Currently, my local Target literally can't keep the show on the shelves; what seems to happen is people buy the movie and then buy the TV show once they see the movie. As of this writing "Serenity" is #25 and "Firefly" #29 on Amazon's DVD top sellers.


Also, Universal needs franchises, and needs them badly. That's why Romero and Whedon got in the door in the first place; "Serenity" and LOTD were dirt cheap and had guaranteed audience appeal. The question becomes how much of a budget are they willing to offer Whedon?

So, I think a "Serenity" sequel is a very strong possibility. Universal does want to stay in the Joss Whedon business; they've hired him to write and direct a supernatural thriller called "Goners." And, of course, he's got "Wonder Woman" (if there's any justice with Charisma Carpenter in the lead) on the way.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 2:46 pm
by unikrunk
Went into this without having ever seen the show during its run...and loved the fug out of it.

Seriously, my fiancé and I are hooked now, and have been watching the episodes, a little at a time, savoring every moment.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:03 pm
by Gheorghe Zamfir
Theta wrote:Let's not forget part of the reason "Serenity" itself was launched was the fact that those TV boxed sets sold an eyebrow-raising six figures...a number that has only gone up since the movie came out. It remains a very popular seller on Amazon.com. Currently, my local Target literally can't keep the show on the shelves; what seems to happen is people buy the movie and then buy the TV show once they see the movie. As of this writing "Serenity" is #25 and "Firefly" #29 on Amazon's DVD top sellers.


Firefly had impressive DVD sales for a cancelled television series, but in the scope of DVD box sets, it was more a modest success, rather than any kind of staggering record breaker I see a lot of Whedon/Firefly fans claim it to be. Not saying you're claiming that Theta, just responding to a more general sentiment. Serenity the movie, as Joss has said in interviews, was greenlit because folks at Universal just liked the show, it had nothing to do with DVD sales, Universal was moving forward with the pic well before the DVD set was even released.

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:34 pm
by AtomicHyperbole
Theta wrote:Of course not everything Joss Whedon does is gold-plated. The man himself said that on the way back from the premiere of "Alien Resurrection", his wife asked him "to say something funny, so I can remember that you are." Actually, he's self-depreciating in the extreme, and I think the fans somewhat overcompensate for that.

"Buffy", though, you should go back and watch. Part of the reason I love the show is the clever use of horror tropes to reflect actual problems in high school. And there's also "Hush", "The Body" and "Once More With Feeling", which are simply genius.


I'm only stating you can be a Buffy/Firefly fan and merely hold respect for the Whedon, not idolise him. :D

Buffy I aint going back to. I had fun watching it as a teen (was I really 19 when it started? Time flies) and it had some wit to it, but it's not something I want to go back to. Once More With Feeling was great, but I preferred the episode with those grim floating fellas in suits.