Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Firefly
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 90 (171015)
12-22-2004 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by nator
12-22-2004 7:12 PM


Saffron and Kaylee, actually.
And Mal's one of my personal heroes. For the better part of a year, I've been trying to find a way to work in the line "My days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle" on this forum.
So far, the moment hasn't presented itself.
This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 12-22-2004 11:42 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by nator, posted 12-22-2004 7:12 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by nator, posted 12-23-2004 4:02 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 90 (171021)
12-22-2004 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by DrJones*
12-22-2004 9:54 PM


love all of Joss's work
Even the first season of Angel?
I dunno man, that first season was pretty God-awful. It didn't even get passably good until the storyline in Lorne's homeworld at the end of second season.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by DrJones*, posted 12-22-2004 9:54 PM DrJones* has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by DrJones*, posted 12-23-2004 1:42 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 90 (171182)
12-23-2004 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by nator
12-23-2004 4:02 AM


Are you looking forward to Serenity?
Hells yes. I don't think the same crap-risk is there as other Whedon movies... this is his project, y'know? It's not like it's something a studio is doing that he happens to be hired to work on.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by nator, posted 12-23-2004 4:02 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by nator, posted 12-29-2004 9:19 AM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 90 (171183)
12-23-2004 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by DrJones*
12-23-2004 1:42 PM


The first season of Angel was hit and miss, but so was the first of season of Buffy.
Naw... first season of Buffy was low-budget and kinda ghetto, but still pretty solid fun. First season of Angel had me looking for a pair of chopsticks so I could jab one in each eye until they poked through into my brain and ended the horrible pain of watching the damn show.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by DrJones*, posted 12-23-2004 1:42 PM DrJones* has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 90 (172079)
12-29-2004 9:44 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by nator
12-29-2004 9:17 AM


Re: Holmes, Firefly is derivitave, but so what?
My reply to that is that I agree that it is derivitave. Whedon is quite good at setting us up in these familiar genres and themes for the purpose of tweaking and twisting them in unexpected ways.
Totally agreed. My old description of Whedon was that he was an excellent cover artist. He'd lift film tricks and story conventions from other creators, and rearrange them into something generally new. Hell, at least half of Buffy is taken nigh-on directly from the old Claremont/Byrne X-Men run. (Right down to the frikkin' Dark Phoenix storyline at the end of season 6.) Doesn't make it any less entertaining. Or, when you get down to it, any less original. Drawing inspiration from someone else, even if you wear it on your sleeve, doesn't mean you're not doing something new with it.
Although for what it's worth, I'm also a nut for Johnny Cash and Oscar Wilde. So I might just lean towards people who draw inspiration from others.
Dan, do you have the DVD?
Yep.
IOW, have you seen the second Saffron episode? It was never aired.
Oh, yeah. It's one of my favorites. (Between Trash, War Stories, and Ariel, that disc is probably the best in the set.)
"Also... I can kill you with my brain."
This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 12-29-2004 09:53 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by nator, posted 12-29-2004 9:17 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by nator, posted 12-29-2004 10:39 AM Dan Carroll has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 18 of 90 (172108)
12-29-2004 2:36 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Silent H
12-29-2004 2:17 PM


I'll admit I have not seen Angel. My guess is I would not like it, but maybe I would.
Not if you didn't like Buffy, no.
the "every planet is a backwater" motif is moldier than a mummy
Quick pedantic note... that's not the case in Firefly. Only the border planets on the rim of the galaxy are backwater. The core planets are exceedingly wealthy, and highly futuristic and shiny.
Mal's crew, being exceedingly poor, doesn't spend much time on the wealthy planets. And being outlaws, they really don't spend much time near the government centers on the core planets. The only episodes that come to mind where they are on wealthy planets (that come to mind at least, I might be brain-farting) are "Trash" and "Ariel".
On a tangential note... anyone here read "Fray"? It's a comic written by Whedon a few years ago that takes place in the Buffy/Angel world. Good stuff.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 2:17 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 3:49 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 90 (172126)
12-29-2004 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Silent H
12-29-2004 3:49 PM


Okay now, firefly is not real. It is made up.
Uh... yeah, I did catch that. I figured that was why they billed it as sci-fi and not as a documentary.
I did make mention that they did happen upon some futuristic stuff now and then (it was mainly government spaceships though). However the main portion of the series takes place as you mentioned... outside the core.
Well, two out of thirteen episodes were on the core. It's one of the reasons the space setting helps the show... when the plot needs them to be in a futuristic setting, there they are. When the plot needs them in a place that, technologically, is backwards by even our standards, there they are. So they set up a galaxy that allows for the characters to be in whatever setting they needed for the episode.
Even apart from that, I think it's usually a sign of a good writer that they build a world that keeps going, even if they characters in question aren't involved with it at the moment. In about eleven episodes, they barely acknowledge the core planets. But what's going on there is vital to the plot with Simon and River, and we get back to the developments there as the plot needs it.
Sadly, that plot got cot-strangled, but you see my point. The involvement of a shiny new future is a big part of the show, just not one that shows up all the time.
I felt Buffy got stifled trying to hold on to its reason for existence. First there was a school and then the store (which seemed ripped off from the series Friday the 13th). It felt like people were forced to be together because they had to to keep it going.
Eh, that happens in any show where the characters turn 18. "Oh, fuck, how are they gonna keep 'em all in the same place?" syndrome. But in fairness to Buffy, the only character I didn't buy staying around was Willow. It made sense that Buffy would go to state school, and that Xander wouldn't go to college at all. It doesn't really make sense that Giles would hang around forever, and... well, he leaves, sixth season.
I was thinking Angel might be free of that because it didn't have anything it had to hang on to, it could grow and create or destroy elements as it had to.
Angel was cursed by bad writers. There were about five really good episodes per season, and that was about it. I enjoy it, but lord, it isn't good.
I suppose I should ask if you've read the stainless steel rat series?
Never heard of it. Who's it by?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 3:49 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 4:32 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 90 (172137)
12-29-2004 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Silent H
12-29-2004 4:32 PM


Almost all shows are backwater. Hence the writers keep needing plots which need backwater planets.
Well, that's not strictly true. Be warned, I'm going to prove my true nerd now. Out of the fourteen (my bad) episodes:
Serenity: Flips back and forth between high-tech and backwater
The Train Job: Backwater
Bushwacked: Middle of space, far from planets
Shindig: Semi-technologically advanced planet with civil-war era culture
Safe: Backwater
Our Mrs. Reynolds: Middle of space, far from planets
Jaynestown: Backwater
Out of Gas: Middle of space, really really far from planets
Ariel: Really high tech planet
Trash: Really high tech planet
War Stories: Factory-style space station
The Message: Middle of space, ends up on an uninhabited ice planet
Heart of Gold: Backwater
Objects in Space: Middle of Space, far from planets
So when you get down to it, only four of the episodes really focus on the backwater areas of the future.
Stainless Steel Rat is a series of novels by Harry Harrison. I wish someone would make those into movies. Its all humor, but includes great examples of how technology is how you use it, not whether you have it.
Cool, I'll check 'em out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 4:32 PM Silent H has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 5:12 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 90 (172144)
12-29-2004 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Silent H
12-29-2004 5:12 PM


I will say I preferred the ones in space alone, and the only episode I really liked was (I think) only in space. Was it Out of Gas? I can't remember the title, but it had the assassin/bounty hunter that was going insane from spending to much time alone in space.
That was Objects in Space. Out of Gas is the one where the ship breaks down.
I'd say those are the ones I like best too, except I'm such a freak for the show that I'll start saying, "Oo, except for Jaynestown. Oh, and Ariel! Oh, and..." until the only episode left is Safe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Silent H, posted 12-29-2004 5:12 PM Silent H has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 90 (177057)
01-14-2005 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Trae
01-14-2005 4:01 PM


A friend of mine mentioned earlier today that Serendipity
You really didn't pay much attention when watching this show, did you? They say name of the ship (Serenity) about 50 kajillion times per episode.
As a side note, this is the time of the year studios dump movices they don't expect to do well.
True. Sorta like how when a TV studio expects a show to fail, such as a low-budget show based on a movie that bombed, they dump it in as a mid-season replacement.
Sometimes these things surprise the studios. Sometimes not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Trae, posted 01-14-2005 4:01 PM Trae has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Trae, posted 01-15-2005 3:45 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 90 (178082)
01-18-2005 9:25 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Trae
01-15-2005 3:45 AM


Put the fanboy back in the box.
I want to, but I can't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Trae, posted 01-15-2005 3:45 AM Trae has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by nator, posted 01-27-2005 10:24 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 90 (182533)
02-02-2005 9:37 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by nator
01-27-2005 10:24 AM


Incidentally, Schraf... have you seen Wonderfalls? I picked up the DVD yesterday, and it's fantastic. (I mention it because Tim Minear is one of the producers.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by nator, posted 01-27-2005 10:24 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by nator, posted 02-03-2005 11:46 AM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 90 (182885)
02-03-2005 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by nator
02-03-2005 11:46 AM


The general feel of the show, really. It's the same kind of cynical, absurd outlook on life as Dead Like Me, mixed with the same kind of deadpan, sarcastic dialogue you get on Buffy or Firefly.
Not directly the same, mind you... it's just Minear, not Whedon.
Plus, the main character's a cutie.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by nator, posted 02-03-2005 11:46 AM nator has not replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 90 (202583)
04-26-2005 11:50 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by nator
04-25-2005 9:33 PM


Re: Yo, Dan!
Were you aware that the Serenity trailer is being played before The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy?
I'd better not go to the theater. I'd leave a very nerdy mess on the seats.
...and what's with Crashfrog?
Probably inbreeding. I've heard stories about these Missouri types.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by nator, posted 04-25-2005 9:33 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by crashfrog, posted 04-26-2005 3:05 PM Dan Carroll has not replied
 Message 63 by Entomologista, posted 04-26-2005 5:26 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 90 (202590)
04-26-2005 12:00 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by crashfrog
04-26-2005 11:43 AM


Does she ever have sex in the series?
Yeah, in Out of Gas. Plus, I know she doesn't actually have sex with him, but she's throwing herself at Simon the whole way through.
I would have been refreshed without the "I've got to redeem the ship's hooker" plotline that so informed the entire series.
I never got the "redeem the hooker" vibe off this show. The feeling I got was always that Mal was being an asshole when he ripped on her for what she does, and that Inara was being hypocritical when Mal slept with her friend in Heart of Gold. Not because of any morality or immorality to prostitution, but because the characters are supposed to be in love, and people in love are stupid, thoughtless, and irrational.
Ugly frickin' ship. Spaceflight is exhilarating. Spaceflight is glorious, making angels gods of the men and women who do it. Their spaceship should be their chariot, and even a "broken down" bottom-of-the-heap junkpile should look like a spaceship.
So we can assume that you prefer the Episodes I and II to the original Star Wars trilogy?
Whedon's problem is Firefly is that he never has the characters do anything we might not indentify with
Maybe not characters that you identify with. Which is fair. But I identify with Mal way too easily for my own comfort.
This message has been edited by [Dan's Clever Alias], 04-26-2005 11:03 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by crashfrog, posted 04-26-2005 11:43 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by crashfrog, posted 04-26-2005 3:25 PM Dan Carroll has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024