Hee hee - that one's been in my signature for a while, but today I just added "I swallowed a bug!" from Serenity - one of my faves that keeps making me chuckle.eva01 said:
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"Serenity" movie discussion - spoiler warning!
- Thread starter nagromme
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maaaaybe - it's as good an explanation as any. One thing is for certain, there is something deeply personal that motivated her to leave the comfort of the inner worlds - she was definitely on track to become a Priestess, and is by many accounts highly respected as a Companion.nagromme said:
I forgot the "bug" line. Perfect reaction to extreme peril 
I think I may have to go see the movie again...
"Serenity" is now the second-fastest growing search on Google.
And you can watch it online (the first 9 minutes anyway) here:
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/index.html
Kind of gives the wrong impression--that 9-minute lead-in is the only part of the movie with the traditional (aka boring?) sterile sci-fi feel, and you really don't get to meet the main characters! They cut the sample off before the fun begins. But they can't give away the whole movie...
PS, the Wobbly-Headed Doll Caper (aka Trash) is on Firefly tonight! One of my favorite episodes. A perfect chance for people who have seen the movie to meet Mal's OTHER "ex."
I think I may have to go see the movie again..."Serenity" is now the second-fastest growing search on Google.
And you can watch it online (the first 9 minutes anyway) here:
http://video.vividas.com/CDN1/3929_Serenity/web/index.html
Kind of gives the wrong impression--that 9-minute lead-in is the only part of the movie with the traditional (aka boring?) sterile sci-fi feel, and you really don't get to meet the main characters! They cut the sample off before the fun begins. But they can't give away the whole movie...
PS, the Wobbly-Headed Doll Caper (aka Trash) is on Firefly tonight! One of my favorite episodes. A perfect chance for people who have seen the movie to meet Mal's OTHER "ex."
I just got back from a week in Finland with no real internet access. I'm glad to see that a spoiler-ridden discussion exists! I have nothing new to add, just my opinions
Frankly, I was somewhat disappointed in the movie. I thought that, as others have mentioned, a good deal of the humor with regard to intra-crew interactions was missing, and also that the treatment of the Tams during the movie did not seem nearly as friendly as the series implied it would be at this point - I would have expected them to be full crew members, or at least treated as members of the family (esp. given the final series episode on the DVD set and where it implied things were going). Inara seemed way too docile for me as well.
I understand Book's death, although I did not like it. I am surprised that there was no more insight into his past - seems like Joss just decided to punt on that one.
And Wash's death? Hated it. Ruined the movie for me. I'd have to think that there were other ways to make us think they might all die, or that perhaps it wasn't critical to the movie that we all thought that in the first place. After his death, I sort of wished they'd all die, going down together. Just hated it. I understand that there might have been real-world reasons for it. But, as far as my love for the Serenity universe is concerned, there's a big hole in my heart now that Wash is dead. Book... well, I'm really annoyed that he dies, but I could live with it. I'm upset about Wash. Thank god we still have Jayne for comic relief.
And, as others have said, I didn't buy The Operative's conversion as a simple result of seeing the Reaver transformation. Seemed too tidy to me.
OK, that said... I enjoyed the movie up until Wash died. Then... it lost all appeal to me.
Of course, I'll see it again anyway and buy the DVD.
Frankly, I was somewhat disappointed in the movie. I thought that, as others have mentioned, a good deal of the humor with regard to intra-crew interactions was missing, and also that the treatment of the Tams during the movie did not seem nearly as friendly as the series implied it would be at this point - I would have expected them to be full crew members, or at least treated as members of the family (esp. given the final series episode on the DVD set and where it implied things were going). Inara seemed way too docile for me as well.
I understand Book's death, although I did not like it. I am surprised that there was no more insight into his past - seems like Joss just decided to punt on that one.
And Wash's death? Hated it. Ruined the movie for me. I'd have to think that there were other ways to make us think they might all die, or that perhaps it wasn't critical to the movie that we all thought that in the first place. After his death, I sort of wished they'd all die, going down together. Just hated it. I understand that there might have been real-world reasons for it. But, as far as my love for the Serenity universe is concerned, there's a big hole in my heart now that Wash is dead. Book... well, I'm really annoyed that he dies, but I could live with it. I'm upset about Wash. Thank god we still have Jayne for comic relief.
And, as others have said, I didn't buy The Operative's conversion as a simple result of seeing the Reaver transformation. Seemed too tidy to me.
OK, that said... I enjoyed the movie up until Wash died. Then... it lost all appeal to me.
Of course, I'll see it again anyway and buy the DVD.
Just got back from seeing the film and wanted to catch up with this thread that I've been avoiding since it started. There's a lot to think about here, so rather than digging around and quoting, I'll just go with the thoughts as they arrive:
Book's Death: Don't know about the real-world reasoning, but he looked ill in the movie - seriously thin in the face. Maybe his few scenes were all he could manage.
Book's Origin: Remember that line that Jubal says in "Objects in Space" - where he sees Book unconscious and says: "He's no shepherd"? I think the theory that he's an ex-operative seems most likely.
Wash's Death: Gutted. Was on a serious downer on the way out of the cinema. I love it when storytellers mess with your expectations though - I forget who said it, but for the first time in a long time, all bets were off at the end of a "Hollywood" movie. I have to admit, I actually said "no!" out loud when it happened.
Blue-gloved Men: Has no one in this thread read the comic series that bridges the tv shows and the film? You see more of them in that, and you find out that it's not just their hands that are blue...
That's all I can think to add for now; still reeling from the film. Was an amazing ride.
<br>
Book's Death: Don't know about the real-world reasoning, but he looked ill in the movie - seriously thin in the face. Maybe his few scenes were all he could manage.
Book's Origin: Remember that line that Jubal says in "Objects in Space" - where he sees Book unconscious and says: "He's no shepherd"? I think the theory that he's an ex-operative seems most likely.
Wash's Death: Gutted. Was on a serious downer on the way out of the cinema. I love it when storytellers mess with your expectations though - I forget who said it, but for the first time in a long time, all bets were off at the end of a "Hollywood" movie. I have to admit, I actually said "no!" out loud when it happened.
Blue-gloved Men: Has no one in this thread read the comic series that bridges the tv shows and the film? You see more of them in that, and you find out that it's not just their hands that are blue...
That's all I can think to add for now; still reeling from the film. Was an amazing ride.
<br>
jsw said:And Wash's death? Hated it. Ruined the movie for me. I'd have to think that there were other ways to make us think they might all die, or that perhaps it wasn't critical to the movie that we all thought that in the first place. After his death, I sort of wished they'd all die, going down together. Just hated it. I understand that there might have been real-world reasons for it. But, as far as my love for the Serenity universe is concerned, there's a big hole in my heart now that Wash is dead. Book... well, I'm really annoyed that he dies, but I could live with it. I'm upset about Wash. Thank god we still have Jayne for comic relief.
And, as others have said, I didn't buy The Operative's conversion as a simple result of seeing the Reaver transformation. Seemed too tidy to me.
OK, that said... I enjoyed the movie up until Wash died. Then... it lost all appeal to me.
Of course, I'll see it again anyway and buy the DVD.
I disagree, as much as I hated it, the only way to convince the audience that all bets are off is to kill a beloved character brutally so that there is no question in anyone's mind that they are dead. Book was no longer a major character and already dead. This left Mal, River, Kaylee, Zoe, Wash, Simon, Inara, and Jayne.
Jayne is not well liked enough, he's funny but you always get the sense he would betray everyone if he thought he could pull it off. His death would not have had the impact.
Simon can't be killed because someone has to take care of River when she gets out of control, that and he has to "get it on" with Kaylee so she has to live as well.
River is too central a role for sequels so she has to live.
Mal can't go since he's the leader.
This leaves Zoe and Wash. Zoe is the tough one so if you kill her Wash is most likely going to be worthless in a fight. Wash is also the person more people identify with, he's approachable, funny, and extremely likeable. Also just due to where they were seated in the bridge Wash was the easy target. If they don't kill Wash then every injury after that point is going to be the Hollywood cliche close to death and come back at the end injuries. With Wash dead you can't be sure about anyone.
As for the Operative I see three reasons that he converted rather than just the video:
1. The video obviously shakes his faith in the alliance.
2. Mal beat him. The Operative believes he is unbeatable, partly because of the strength of his convictions. Being beaten my Mal makes him start to question not only his skills but his faith as well.
3. Mal let him live. As he sits there watching the video he is also thinking about how he was beat and why his opponent let him live when he wouldn't hesitate to kill a foe.
There are probably more reasons but the three above give a good start as to why he let them go at the end.
I'm not a comic reader, but I think I might just have to check those out. I understand they tell why Book is back at the Abbey too. (And maybe they tell how the gang could afford such a nice new Mule!)Badradio said:
Re Wash's death: hated that too (and Book's bothered me almost as much)--but still loved the movie. If it was me I would have preferred to see Zoe killed, because in future movies, seeing Wash cope without Zoe sounds more interesting than the reverse. Plus Zoe's duties overlap Jayne's somewhat.
Actually, I might have picked River since she was my least favorite character (although I see her importance). But I like her better now--and if she's a) sane, b) a genius fighting machine and c) a pilot... that makes her a better character than before. She just had to get there.
But you just KNOW--zero doubt--that if it had continued as a TV show, people would have died on it. Joss Whedon breaks rules, and one that he loves to break is "you don't kill main characters without a LOT of buildup." I wouldn't be surprised if Wash was marked for death from episode one. (And maybe the death will trigger planned changes to Zoe's character too. PROBABLY not as severe as Willow!)
Re the Operative: he was fine, but I didn't like him as much as reviewers did. (Dirty Pretty Things was good BTW.) I don't know that he changes sides, so much as just had the fight taken out of him. He did help in the end, but he was hardly a friend. Mal said he'd kill him next time they met!
It's always possible more is planned for the Operative in future....
I'm going again tomorrow. I didn't think Serenity was going to gain any screens this weekend, but I can say that in MY area (US) it's playing in twice as many theaters, and hasn't lost any time slots either.
PS, as you may already know, the beginning of the new Battlestar Galactica had a fly-by cameo for Serenity (on Caprica)--a tribute to Firefly by the FX team (Zoic) that handles both worlds. But supposedly Serenity ALSO has a tribute to BG! Somewhere in the film, Galactica supposedly makes a nearly-hidden cameo. I'll be looking to see if it's true. A Reaver Galactica would be kinda cool
Anyone spot the battlestar anywhere? (I'm thinking they might even have used it sneakily as a building, or shrunk down as part of another ship.)
eva01 said:
I have been, and am enjoying it enormously. Tonights episode was a classic.
I'm just sayin' that they movie presented more than a few scenes where it seemed like everyone was about to quit. I just wish they had balanced that with some good times in the movie.
I still don't understand why Wash and Book had to die. Are there any solid ideas floating around? Or will that be explained in the sequels. I really liked Wash and Book, main characters don't have to die. Give one a limp or something, battle scars are cool.
Well, "HAVE to" die is a subjective and artistic decision, and not everyone can agree on those things. I really wish they hadn't died--and if I DIDN'T wish that then Joss would have failed to make me care. Twisted as it seems, we're supposed to wish they hadn't died. (Plus, there may have been issues with the actors being unable to commit to future movies? Just like Tara again...)
But I do see the storytelling value of their deaths. And in Joss Whedon's worlds, you have action, comedy and drama all combined, and people do die. It does add real tension watching one of his creations, because beloved characters really CAN die. In some movies/shows you just know that's not going to happen, and it makes everything just a little more artificial.
But again--even if I can understand the deaths on some level--I don't have to like it! Joss created some great characters, and they will be missed.
And I almost forgot--re the Tams' relationship to Mal and the others. Yes, it did seem to have "backslid" compared to the end of Firefly. Partly just necessary to create a self-contained plot arc for the movie. (And maybe the comics explain a little?) But also, there are new reasons for tension: Mal has just started using River for crime (nearly getting her killed by Reavers). And Simon is just revealed to have been hiding some of what he knows about River's abilities and the deadly threat that she might be--to anyone! So Mal and Simon both have good reasons to suddenly be on less friendly terms.
Thus Mal, who previously considered Simon and River crew (see the end of "Ariel"), now talks about them early in the movie as NOT being crew. His feelings have changed. And yet--his actions speak louder than those words. Seeing River go spaztastic is hardly reason for a change of heart. She almost shot him! Seeing that should make Mal LESS likely to want her aboard. But even so, he couldn't go through with the plan to strand them.
(And re Simon knowing more about River's condition from the start than he did on Firefly... I guess all along he DID know more than he let on, and was hiding it! But he didn't know the details--thus the need to visit Ariel's facilities.)
But I do see the storytelling value of their deaths. And in Joss Whedon's worlds, you have action, comedy and drama all combined, and people do die. It does add real tension watching one of his creations, because beloved characters really CAN die. In some movies/shows you just know that's not going to happen, and it makes everything just a little more artificial.
But again--even if I can understand the deaths on some level--I don't have to like it! Joss created some great characters, and they will be missed.
And I almost forgot--re the Tams' relationship to Mal and the others. Yes, it did seem to have "backslid" compared to the end of Firefly. Partly just necessary to create a self-contained plot arc for the movie. (And maybe the comics explain a little?) But also, there are new reasons for tension: Mal has just started using River for crime (nearly getting her killed by Reavers). And Simon is just revealed to have been hiding some of what he knows about River's abilities and the deadly threat that she might be--to anyone! So Mal and Simon both have good reasons to suddenly be on less friendly terms.
Thus Mal, who previously considered Simon and River crew (see the end of "Ariel"), now talks about them early in the movie as NOT being crew. His feelings have changed. And yet--his actions speak louder than those words. Seeing River go spaztastic is hardly reason for a change of heart. She almost shot him! Seeing that should make Mal LESS likely to want her aboard. But even so, he couldn't go through with the plan to strand them.
(And re Simon knowing more about River's condition from the start than he did on Firefly... I guess all along he DID know more than he let on, and was hiding it! But he didn't know the details--thus the need to visit Ariel's facilities.)
Well, I've slept on it now and given the events of the movie time to sink in, but they won't; I'm still in shock. That was such a good film! I did leave the cinema wondering where they could take a sequel, thinking that they'd just pick another character and tell their story, but the comments above about a new war and the fall of the Alliance... I like that idea. I thought the start of the movie played a bit too much like another show in the series, but the scope expanded so quickly... if that process continues, this is going to be a fantastic trilogy. I'm not going to say that it could rival Star Wars 1-3 - that trilogy exists within it's own "Star Wars" genre and defies comparison - but in terms of creativity and brave, unpredictable narrative, there's been nothing to beat this in a long time.
honestly how can someone dying ruin a movie for you, thats kinda....
i think the deaths actually made the movie for me, like i honestly thought that they may all be killed, that Mal will get the message out to the 'verse and that the reavers would kill them all. That made it just that more exciting.
Its a good thing that they died or it wouldn't have added the extra suspense that i so craved.
i think the deaths actually made the movie for me, like i honestly thought that they may all be killed, that Mal will get the message out to the 'verse and that the reavers would kill them all. That made it just that more exciting.
Its a good thing that they died or it wouldn't have added the extra suspense that i so craved.
It's already been dropped by two theaters in my area this weekend.
I've been telling everyone I know to go see it, since many people, including my parents, haven't even heard of the movie or knew that it was out!
(Way to advertise, Universal)
Edit:
And the DVD set of the series has jumped from #7 to #4 on the Amazon top selling DVD list since the movie came out!
I've been telling everyone I know to go see it, since many people, including my parents, haven't even heard of the movie or knew that it was out!
(Way to advertise, Universal)
Edit:
And the DVD set of the series has jumped from #7 to #4 on the Amazon top selling DVD list since the movie came out!
iPoster said:It's already been dropped by two theaters in my area this weekend.
I've been telling everyone I know to go see it, since many people, including my parents, haven't even heard of the movie or knew that it was out!
(Way to advertise, Universal)
they did wonderful advertising around here, every theatre has it and i have got a bunch of people to go and see it.
Must be a lot of regional variation.
Apparently second-Friday's numbers were good (but sound bad). The movie dropped by less than the 60% expected of sci-fi movies in the second weekend, and less than other movies dropped. And Wallace and Gromit--a far more mainstream movie and one children can see--opened about the same as Serenity opened.
Seems to be a low-turnout weekend at the box office overall, but Serenity is holding its own. Now, how many theaters will renew it for a long slow run?
The bottom line of course is that many excellent, critically-acclaimed movies do NOT do great at the box office. If the public didn't lap up garbage, TV and movies would be very different things today. So I'd MUCH MUCH rather see a great movie that did "OK" than a blockbuster Serenity that was garbage. Even if that garbage got sequels. Going "mainstream" isn't worth it.
Which isn't to say the marketing couldn't have been better. If there are sequels, maybe some lessons can be learned for marketing them.
And the weekend's not over yet! I'm off for my second viewing today to spot the things I missed the first time
Apparently second-Friday's numbers were good (but sound bad). The movie dropped by less than the 60% expected of sci-fi movies in the second weekend, and less than other movies dropped. And Wallace and Gromit--a far more mainstream movie and one children can see--opened about the same as Serenity opened.
Seems to be a low-turnout weekend at the box office overall, but Serenity is holding its own. Now, how many theaters will renew it for a long slow run?
The bottom line of course is that many excellent, critically-acclaimed movies do NOT do great at the box office. If the public didn't lap up garbage, TV and movies would be very different things today. So I'd MUCH MUCH rather see a great movie that did "OK" than a blockbuster Serenity that was garbage. Even if that garbage got sequels. Going "mainstream" isn't worth it.
Which isn't to say the marketing couldn't have been better. If there are sequels, maybe some lessons can be learned for marketing them.
And the weekend's not over yet! I'm off for my second viewing today to spot the things I missed the first time
nagromme said:
I think that's common. I remember the TV series Dark Angel fell into a category like that. In Canada it was CTV's highest rated Friday program. In the US, nobody was watching it so it got cancelled. There were many articles about the frustration of the Canadian networks that this was not an uncommon thing.
That's always been the key -- not how big Serenity opens, but how well it holds onto it's audience.
Don't forget also that the numbers you are seeing are US only (side note; it's frustrating even in Canada I get told what the top movie in the US was, not the top movie in my own country!). Any numbers you see you have to add in Canadian sales, and with the wide international release this week, international sales. Often times a movie that is underappreciated in the US market makes up for it in an international market. DVD sales will almost certainly be a big part of their financial planning.
The big movie theatre here in Richmond (Silvercity Riverport) is still showing it on two screens -- they wouldn't be doing that if it was a disappointing turnout!
According to Whedonesqu.com, it opened pretty big in the U.K. this weekend. At #2, despite having almost no marketing--even less than the U.S.--until the last minute supposedly?
(If I was in Canada being fed US numbers, that WOULD bug me. Overall international numbers, sure, but numbers that ignore my own country?)
(If I was in Canada being fed US numbers, that WOULD bug me. Overall international numbers, sure, but numbers that ignore my own country?)
nagromme said:
Yeah, it's frustrating all right! According to the local paper Serenity made $10M last weekend ... that's definitely not our number. In general I am unable to actually find a breakdown for the country I actually live in!
I've always figured it's part of the industry's attempts to downplay the revenue numbers -- I notice that almost invariably when a movie's revenue is discussed they talk only US numbers and avoid international numbers, rental revenue, DVD sales, network broadcast contracts etc.
I cynically assume it's a way to make the industry look in more dire straits than it really is, leading to better leverage on tax breaks, "piracy" issues etc.
Really? I usually stay for the entire credits but the friends I was with don't. So I left when they did.nagromme said:
After some consideration the "Blue Sun" part could have been a bit too much to explain in just one movie. Anyway, I just hope that there will be a mini-series in the works after all this.Re "2x2, Hands of Blue"--I agree. But you can only get so much in a movie. (They could have had the surgeons wearing blue gloves, though, or the Operative radioing someone in blue gloves.) As for "Blue Sun"... I guess only the most dedicated trivia buffs will ever know why River stabbed Jayne
nagromme said:
Good points, I just really liked those characters. It is more realistic to have main characters die, that is the reality of war, killing is indiscriminate. Ultimately, I think I that elements of realism in fiction serve the overall message in the storyline, and there is a message. The whole concept and theatrical execution are better served through the loss of main characters, it is what happens in reality. Good guys fall just as often as the bad guys.
eva01 said:
It doesn't really ruin it, but I will miss their presence in the sequels (fingers crossed). The way in which Book and Wash were lost reinforce the more subtle sub-stories.
Hopefully Joss won't cop out and bring them back like Lucas did in Star Wars.
Xtremehkr said:
Well, Whedon has a history of bringing back dead characters.
And he usually does it in a way that we end up wishing they had stayed dead
Although this time there's no Willow to do it for them! Hmm, maybe River will find an old book....
I don't think resurrection is possible in the Serenity world. In the commentary on Firefly Joss said he wasn't going as far toward fantasy in this. No aliens, no intelligent robots, no intelligent spaceships, no magic. In fact, in "Objects In Space" he said that the Serenity-possession thing was going too far (for his vision of the series), but that audiences wouldn't know that so it worked.
Of course, psychic reading is out there! And CAN River "kill you with her brain?" I would think not, but in the Tam Sessions, when she carries out Dr. Mathias' "mission" (guess he got what he deserved in the movie), you really don't see HOW she does it. It looks like a psychic killing, although she could be just off-screen stabbing the guy or something.
Anyway, I can't see any kind of resurrection being anything but really lame and out of place in the Firefly world. And Joss doesn't like lame resurrections. In fact, I can only think of twice that he's done it at all (spoiler warning for Buffy and Angel). Buffy and Spike. Both had magical deaths, and both had a LONG row to hoe to get back to "normal life." No simple resurrection in either case. (I don't count Angel--he wasn't exactly killed, just "sent away.")
Of course, psychic reading is out there! And CAN River "kill you with her brain?" I would think not, but in the Tam Sessions, when she carries out Dr. Mathias' "mission" (guess he got what he deserved in the movie), you really don't see HOW she does it. It looks like a psychic killing, although she could be just off-screen stabbing the guy or something.
Anyway, I can't see any kind of resurrection being anything but really lame and out of place in the Firefly world. And Joss doesn't like lame resurrections. In fact, I can only think of twice that he's done it at all (spoiler warning for Buffy and Angel). Buffy and Spike. Both had magical deaths, and both had a LONG row to hoe to get back to "normal life." No simple resurrection in either case. (I don't count Angel--he wasn't exactly killed, just "sent away.")
Xtremehkr said:
oh don't get me wrong i will miss them all too.
And Joss > Lucas thats all i have to say about that one