rulururu

post Serenity Lost for Good

May 29th, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 12:09 pm

I think this’ll be my last instalment of Serenity Lost.  Sadly, I’m no closer to knowing why Serenity wasn’t a hit. 

If any of you out there can tell me, please let me know.  I mean, look at how much money Indy made, and outside of a bit of nostalgic charm, it wasn’t very good.

If you’re looking for more criticisms of the movie/tv show, there’s a pretty good thread over at Fireflyfans.net.  I especially like the post where someone draws attention to the plot/script problems in “the Message.”  It was like a Harry Potter book.  One three second conversation would have solved everything.

If you’re looking for answers, I just haven’t got any.  Best I can do is join in with your fist shaking at the skies (“Shake harder, boy!”).

post Serenity Lost - Part 5

May 15th, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 11:13 am

You know what? I’m not really in the mood to criticize today. Let’s skip a week and go back to praise for Serenity. This morning I’ve been fondly remembering the movie’s CG special effects.

Frank, from the TV show 30 Rock, explained how CG technology today is in “the valley.” He was referring to animated people now being in the space between cartoon animation and real life that viewers find the images creepy (like CG Stormtroopers and Tom Hanks in the Polar Express). To extend this idea, CG is now capable of almost anything imaginable. Sadly, just because something is possible doesn’t mean that it should necessarily be done. I’m thinking of several sequences in King Kong, or the last couple of Star Wars prequels that were CG just for the sake of CG. They just came across as too much rather than artistic. Shouldn’t the CG compliment the story rather than the other way around. It’s a pretty common argument. When does too much become too much? 

So, let’s bring it back to Serenity. Firefly always had amazing CG for a television show, and even with his limited budget, Whedon had them push it right to their limit for the movie. Every CG aspect was not only realistic, but helped express or emphasize what was going on in the plot. The final Reaver/Alliance battle comes dangerously close to crossing the line into the mess that was the Coruscant battle of Episode II, but you still remain aware of everything that’s going on, and stay focused on the tension and danger to the heroes’ ship throughout. It’s a perfect scenic vehicle to show the audience just how truly outclassed the protagonists are in this universe. Everybody loves an underdog.

Of course, I’m a minority. Everybody wants CG to be big and crazy now-a-days. That’s what audiences are flocking to. It’s hard not to become a cynic. I don’t want to sound like a grumpy old geek, but I couldn’t even tell the Autobots from the Deceptacons during the battles in Transformers.  

post Serenity Lost - Part 4

May 8th, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 10:49 pm

Fillion jokes that he’s stolen a lot from Harrison Ford. The truth is, Harrison’s renown skill to seem like he’s getting the absolute crap kicked out of him only works in a good script (like the original Raiders and a couple of Jack Ryan movies). When it’s used in a campy setting it’s hard to sell. In Serenity, Joss made sure there was no doubt of the seriousness and danger in the script, and because of that, Fillion shone like Indy under a flying wing. There are few things better than a hero who can take a beating, and Mal can certainly do that. Because of his love for the setting, character, and people he was working with, Fillion threw himself into the fight scenes in Serenity. In some ways, it’s unfortunate that they aren’t overshadowed by Summer Glau’s fighting performance. That girl trained for months and provided Joss with skills any director would kill for an actor to have. Still, Fillion bounced his face on purpose so often it swelled up like… well, like a guy’s face if you bash it against plexi-glass enough, and for better or for worse that kind of performance often steals the show.

The point is that the physical dedication and talent of those two in Serenity made for a sci-fi adventure that draws the viewer in and is far more impressionable than Christopher Lee waving his arms around mixed with an obvious double and the epileptic frog that Frank Oz’s masterpiece had been reduced to.

Sorry, I kinda went off there.

 

I love that the BDHs could get so involved in the action of Serenity. Not many actors do.

post Serenity Lost - Part 3

May 2nd, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 11:46 am

Sadly, it’s time for another instalment of what went wrong on Serenity Lost. Today I’m gonna mention the differences in characterization between the TV show and the movie. There were just a few little tweaks made for seemingly obvious reasons (the foremost of these being the old audience vs. new conundrum), but I have to put them in a definite went wrong pile.

 

First off, there’s Mal. I know he was supposed to be darker in the series til Fox said to make him funnier. I get that. I know Whedon was hoping his character would go through more of a progression on the show. So, when it came time for the movie, naturally Joss pulled him back to the darker version he had originally envisioned. Sadly, this character shift was a little unsettling for fans of the show. The place Mal gets to at the end of the movie feels a lot like the place he’s already at by the end of “Objects In Space.” Still, although Conflicted Mal was occasionally unfamiliar and jarring he’s such a great character, so who gives a rat’s ass?

Next up is poor Kaylee. Whedon went to some crazy lengths to give every character a story arc, but Kaylee’s just seems to be faun over Simon - nail Simon. That’s it. She was always so much more than a doting, insert obvious “I like Simon” quote here gal during the series. I know there wasn’t any room to do much more with her in the script. It was just hard to see her reduced to spoon feeding new viewers. It might not have worked, but I would have liked seeing something more subtle and together. 

Last but not least is Jayne. I love Jayne from the pilot episode and his change into the increasingly unintelligent comic relief began gradually from there. It felt like it took another little jump for the movie though. For me, Jayne will always be defined by the interrogation scene with Dobson. It just felt like that street smart/world wise aspect kept slipping away right up to the point where he thinks River’s safe word is going to work on anyone. I also felt the resolution of his traitorous tendencies and his mysterious (but interesting) fear of Mal’s moods could have been worked into the movie rather than just dismissed (presumably once again for the sake of new viewers). I’ve got a term for when an exceedingly cool character gets reduced to a simple comic relief, and I can’t help but feel like Jayne got Gimlied.

post Serenity Lost - Part 2

April 28th, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 11:16 am

At the end of the commentary on the Serenity Special Edition, Adam Baldwin said something to the effect of them having done their best, but that you can’t control the audience. I don’t think I got that quite right. Go listen to the commentary if you wanna check, but you probably get the idea.

As I’ve said, after repeated viewings, I’ve more than warmed up to Serenity. Whether you agree with it or not, Whedon gave a boatload of thought to every inch of that script, and (despite unwarranted criticisms) did a very skilled and deliberate job of directing. The actors gave their all, and it really came across. Still, it failed to strike a chord with audiences. 

Now let’s face facts.  When you say “audiences” you more or less mean “American audiences.”  Worldwide sales are a feather in your cap, but the U.S. is where a film makes its real cash. So, that means that Serenity failed to connect with the American people. It’s easy to lose track of what that means sometimes. A lot of what you see or hear paints an “enlightened” opinion. You get the impression that the Bush administration is the worst thing to ever happen to the States, reality TV is the root of all evil, musicians are graded on their skill, and well crafted and creative movies are the industry’s goal.     

It’s very easy for a guy like me to buy into that and accept it as popular opinion. The problem is that this opinion represents a very small and vocal percentage of the population. Politics, culture, and industry are driven by the masses. Like it or not, these masses are the true American people, and if you take a step back you get a clear picture of what that means.  More people have repeatedly voted for Bush than those who voted against him, which means he actually represents the nation’s values and beliefs. Reality TV continues to grow in popularity and eats up the air time of traditional shows. To bring it all back on topic, why not surf one of the movie sites that list how much movies brought in, and get a look at the long list of films that have done significantly better than Serenity.    

Welcome to the world of the real. Placing the blame for Serenity’s failure on the shoulders of Whedon and the crew is like blaming Greenpeace for dead whales.

post Serenity Lost - Part 1

April 25th, 2008

Filed under: Serenity Lost — Pinto @ 9:15 am

So, Whedon got his movie after Firefly was cancelled, but Serenity failed to reach its $80 million target to get a sequel. What happened? I’m gonna bounce back and forth on comic strip days between what I think worked and what didn’t.

It’s safe to say that I was a total Browncoat fanboy. I made a fanfilm and flew down to Atlanta to show it off.  However, after watching Serenity in the theatre, I lost interest for about a year. After eventual repeated viewings, I learned to accept that Serenity is a pretty sound movie which has lured me back. At the time, I can remember that it was the wholesale character slaughter that turned me off. I’d never watched Buffy or Angel and hadn’t been exposed to that particular storytelling technique of Whedon’s. While the fanboy in me was disappointed to see characters I loved die, that wasn’t what turned me off.  

What originally sealed the deal on being a Browncoat for me was the camaraderie and sense of family between not just the characters, but the actors as well.  You can’t watch a bonus feature off any of the discs without realizing how close the cast and crew were.  You have to assume how rare something personal like that is in the soulless corporate greed machine that is Hollywood. When the TV show was cancelled, they were all devastated. You could feel it. The button that Tudyk sent Joss is one of the most touching industry stories I’ve ever heard (go watch the TV commentaries if you don’t know what I’m talking about).

Whether I agree with them or not, I think I understand all of the reasons why Whedon killed off Book and Wash.  It’s sometimes hard to see the subtitles when you get the explanations given to fans. What bothered me the most, and pulled me right out of the story at the time, was that he did it to the actors. With sequels being a clear goal, to remove Tudyk and Glass from the ride felt like excluding immediate family from Christmas. Sure actors like a good death scene, but it seemed like this bunch truly loved working together in this world Joss had made. To me, that personal connection should be more important than anything, including the pile of cash a studio hands you and even the fans you’re trying to please (as unprofessional as that may seem). The odds of Whedon gathering such a family again are exceedingly unlikely. To break that once in a lifetime family up for what was questionably the good of the story just felt horribly wrong.

Any other criticisms I might have pale in comparison, probably because the rest are more cerebral than heartfelt.

ruldrurd