?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Serenity - The Mad Schemes of Dr. Tectonic [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Beemer

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Serenity [May. 6th, 2005|01:05 am]
Beemer
Joss Whedon is a fucking bastard and he made me cry.

You had BETTER go see his movie.

Because it's really, really good.

We just got back from the special preview showing of Serenity (all praise to kung_fu_monkey for being quick on the ball and getting tickets). And it was... wow. More than just another episode of the series. I'd say it's almost like a second season, condensed and distilled into two hours.

It still has all the stuff that I liked about the original: good writing, and a great cast, and little moments that mean more than they seem to on the surface. And this time, they had a real budget to do lots of stuff they could never do for a TV show. It's... a muchness of Firefly. And like I said, it made me cry. Openly. Three times in a row.

And having seen a movie that isn't finished, I now understand the point of post-production, and how much work has to be done to make a movie finished and polished.

If you haven't watched Firefly yet, you have four months to buy, borrow, steal, or download the series, watch it, and fall in love. Because come September, you need to see Serenity.
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: k8cre8
2005-05-06 10:29 am (UTC)
Deadwood is worth Netflixing, and I've not yet seen more than clips (it's in my queue, but, as far as I can tell, from discussions and other press, is that the one develeoped character is really Swearengen. But, I've not seen it, so that might be incorrect.

I think Firefly has weaknesses, and one of them is that there are *9* main characters. In the handful of episodes there were, the characters only had time to become individuals, not fully-formed characters. It would take years, at the rate, they were going to become full characters. I was interested in all of them, and I cared about all of them, but, the build was going to be slow. It might've worked better to introduce the other characters over time.

One way to illustrate this: In the 2-hour beginning of Firefly, you know that each character is distinct: you'd never confuse Kaylee for Inara (physical looks aside), or Mal for Simon. In 2 years, I couldn't distinguish between the two male minority CSI guys on CSI:Miami. Now that one was killed off, I distinguish them as the one that died, and the one that didn't die. now, granted, the characters in a CSI show take a backseat to the procedural, but, my point is, I could distinquish the Firefly characters, and felt they all offered potential.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: bryree
2005-05-06 11:36 am (UTC)
I remember reading somewhere (it might even have been here) an opinion that the largest problem with character development (or non-) in Firefly was the number of "main" characters that were introduced all at once, thus limiting the time for establishing them and making the audience care about them individually. I tend to agree with that assessment. In both 'Buffy' and 'Angel,' the viewer only had to get to know three or four "mains" initially, and then got to know others as the series progressed. That established a "care factor" that perhaps kept more people watching longer. They were able to ask: "ooh, how does this new person relate to this other one that I care about already?" rather than continuing to ask "OK, so who are these people?" for the longer time required by more characters being developed all at once.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)