Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefly would it be as well regarded if there had been a S2?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Firefly would it be as well regarded if there had been a S2?

    After American Aurora thread on Hearing from Whedon and vampmogs talking about his other projects post Buffy not being great, it got me thinking about Firefly.

    So Firefly despite being only 1 season and 1 movie is highly regarded. Here's the question though. If there had been a S2 would it be as well regarded. Hearing about some of the ideas such Inara being raped then getting revenge by killing them by having sex with them (confirmed by Tim Minear I believe), I'm a bit about that idea to say the least.

    The Blue hand guys I guess would've been developed more but never really felt threatening to me in S1. The whole plot of them killing everyone in the hospital was really stupid and straight out of the dumb evil villain playbook. Also I need something more than Blue gloves for a villain to be threatening.

    Anyway If Firefly had more time would it be as highly regarded or would it have gone the way of Dollhouse that even hard core JW fans don't like to talk about ?

    Personally for me Firefly was OK with some decent episodes but nothing really incredible. I actually preferred the movie to the series and thought that was a fun time.

  • #2
    Honestly, I think it's overrated. What turned it into such an audience darling, IMO, is that after Fox cancelled it, Whedon channeled his own personal offense and outrage that anybody would dare cancel his newest darling creation into a very effective media campaign in interviews and so on to stir up outrage in its small audience. I remember reading one interview with him in which he compared trying to shop the show to smaller networks after Fox cancelled it to "asking all the ugly girls to the prom" and being turned down (!). He also presented the show as being like a metaphor for his struggles as a true artist with his own vision versus the controlling networks and studios trying to interfere with him. And a lot of the show is rooted in themes and myths about American individualism, the little guy versus the government that inevitably tries to extend beyond its proscribed role and limits and take over every aspect of the population's lives; these themes and myths are so rooted in American society and history and our mythology that they broadly appeal to people all across the political spectrum. (Reminds me of the scene from Monty Python's The Life of Brian when the crowd mindlessly parrots back to Brian, "Yes! We are all individuals!") Lots of shows had been cancelled by Fox even back then; what the hell made THIS one so much more of a travesty?

    I live in, grew up in, and was born in the American South, so finding out that Whedon took inspiration from reading a book about the perspectives of ex-Confederate soldiers after the Civil War really surprised the hell out of me. Seriously, Whedon, you somehow found some kind of what, intellectual or philosophical kinship with ex-Confederates? Are you ****ing kidding me?

    I find the cast of characters to be mostly a mixture of various tropes found on his previous two shows. Half the actors, IMO, are very good. Unfortunately, he focused on the characters played by the (again, IMO) less talented half. And the series lead, Malcolm Reynolds...I don't know if its the writing, or that something about Nathan Fillion just fundamentally rubs me the wrong way on a sub-atomic level. But I cannot stand that this preening, bullying thug who is far more defined by what he opposes/dislikes (including, it seems, that his side lost) than by anything he might actually believe in, was presented as not just the hero, but one who was in the right. It's easy to cast whoever or whatever you dislike as the Devil Incarnate. People do it all the time. I just never got a clear idea of what Mal actually stood for.

    Comment


    • #3
      I have only watched the series and film once, although I own them both. I'm sure I will rewatch them and I did enjoy them but I also probably liked the film more if I had to choose between the two. Together they nicely expand though and I suspect if the film didn't exist I wouldn't have bought the series but I'll enjoy them more rewatching them as a complete pair.

      I can't remember the timeline of the film and series, if there would have been the scope to place a second season before the film or if it would have had to be sans Wash and fall after the two. It's hard to imagine how that would have worked going on but there's always scope for new characters/stories. I think a second season could have worked but I think it is possibly also fair to say the high regard it gets may in part be due to the fans feeling like it was cut down when there were lots more stories to tell. It makes people more nostalgic for what it was and so what it could have gone on to be.

      Comment

      Working...
      X