Firefly (1 Viewer)

[Will Cunningham]

I was somewhat dissapointed by the first episode. It was definately not a slam dunk "watch this episode get hooked" episode. That said I did love parts of it, the henchman thing at the end was great.
If I did not know this was created by Joss and co, I would probabbly record one more episode and see if it gets better, then dump it and wait for word of mouth to let me know that it has indeed gotten better. Given that it is made by Joss and pals I will definately keep it on my "to record" list and anxiously await that magical moment when things click and the show becomes a quirky "must see" show. The only concern that I have is will it be given enough time to find it's leggs.
I don't disagree with Jason that it does seem in keeping with the archtypes used in other mutant enemy productions, but I look at that as a good thing. I want more of the buffy goodness and buffy in space is acceptable to me, heck I hope it ends up being good enough to be worthy of being called "buffy in space".

 

[LarryDavenport]

The only thing I'm dissapointed in is that more HTF people seem to be ripping on the show than praising it. I can't remember the last Friday Night show I liked and I really liked Firefly. I'm glad it's not another futuristic alien sci-fi. You guys can watch your Star Trek, Babylon 5, Stargate, Farscape, etc., tapes for that.

This is the best faux-Western since Brisco County!

 

[Jason Seaver]

Let's not go overboard there, Larry. Let's see if the show can prove that it's worth comparison to "Legend" before using it in the same sentence as "Brisco".

I want more of the buffy goodness and buffy in space is acceptable to me,

Geez, where were you when I thought that Scott Lobdell's plan to do that in the comics was a good thing!
Another thing I'm worried about is that the cast seems too large - eight or nine characters is a good number to grow to, but the last few Trek series seem to indicate that someone gets lost (I'm guessing it's Gina Torres's character's husband here).

 

[Michael St. Clair]

I finally watched it on the Tivo last night.

Acknowledging the vacuum of space does not make a show 'hard sci-fi'.

And a show does not need to be 'hard sci-fi' to be good. Give me Farscape on a good day over many shows that are somewhat more realistic and/or deal with issues of the meaning of life, existence, evolution, and so on. I love a good space opera.

And I love 'Brisco' and 'Legend' (did anybody have the foresight to tape this?). But those 'westerns' had something that I don't see in 'Firefly' yet. Charisma. Give me a decent character actor or two, a nifty setting and some good writers and I probably won't give a hoot about the basic premise of the show. In fact, I'd argue that the very best TV shows of all time did not succeed because of their premise.

Anyhow, I'm no Joss fanboy, but I'll stick around for a few more weeks.

But I'm not too optimistic.

 

[Dan Paolozza]

The biggest put-off for me was how thick the "western" icing was laid on. And I'll agree with Seaver about the dialogue: almost every character (save the doctor, I think) had a smart remark for every situation or scene - to the point where entire conversations would boil down to one-liner retorts. Joss - or someone- overdid it.

Now, it sounds like his hand got forced a bit, and it sounds like after the initial pilot-splash (or non-splash), the show will become more story and character driven, as opposed to an hour of action peppered with one-liners.

He's got a lot of good characters going for him, and if there's one thing Joss is good at, it's not wasting good and interesting characters (if he can help it). He's got a good premise, and I too like genre-crossing.

It never once occurred to me that this show was considered "sci-fi." Is there some marketing campaign I missed out on? I love "hard" sci-fi, and I get pretty ruffled when the term is "abused." So I'm interested to know who claims this show is "Sci-fi?"

I liked this show...I don't love it, but that may come. And I'm not sure if I'm a young-adult or not...I definitely used to be...how long does it last?

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Dan,

I agree they went to far with the western analogy and motif.

Like I said, I'll give it a while longer. At least 3 episodes.

 

[Jason Seaver]

It never once occurred to me that this show was considered "sci-fi." Is there some marketing campaign I missed out on? I love "hard" sci-fi, and I get pretty ruffled when the term is "abused." So I'm interested to know who claims this show is "Sci-fi?"

Well, I don't think I would have known Whedon was looking for a Western vibe if I hadn't been following the development. I don't see many ads these days, but the ones I saw during Red Sox games all summer heavily played up the sci-fi/spaceships aspect - I was really surprised by how much of a Western it was.

 

[TheLongshot]

I watched it on Friday. My reaction?

Yawn.

Really bad when something doesn't grab you from the first episode. Personally, John Doe played much better. I'll probably be watching more Firefly since it is on before John Doe.

And Rex, yes there are other things you can do in outer space other than meet aliens.

Jason

 

[Andrew Beacom]

It's funny that some people, me among them, will give an average sci-fi show like Enterprise more than a season to prove it's worth. Yet with Firefly some people don't want to give the thing more than a couple of episodes. SO how long would we give it with the ST brand? Or are we happier to watch a show when we know it'll be around for 7 years? At least Firefly will have to earn a full/2nd season.

I'll be giving it at least half a season. Unless it gets worse than Enterprise. Is that possible? Of course it seems that some people don't think the show will get more than half a season. I'm at least waiting till we have seen more than the rehashed and interferred with premiere.

Did Fox actually do market research to determine that sci-fi/space opera fans must have action? Or did they just assume it?

 

[Phil Florian]

Fox is literrally run by monkeys with fountain pens, I think. Man, the sci-fi elite come out in full! Where are the Western elite who are like "What is Firefly West of?" It is genre. You ask 100 people what that show is and 90 of them will say sci fi. That is why it is sci fi. You go to the book store and look in the sci fi section. Douglas Adams, Terry Brooks and Terry Pratchett are there along with Heinlein, Asimov and Clarke. Under sci fi. If I ask the clerk where the sci fi is, they will point me there. If I hold up the Aliens DVD and ask what genre, they will say sci fi. I ask the rocket scientists at NASA what "Hitchhikers Guide..." is considered. Scifi-humor. I know, because I ask them. Sheesh. The genre has a hard time enough getting accepted by more people let alone the folks who argue "trekkie" vs. "trekker."

Good point from Andrew. People are giving the Star Trek license YEARS of time. It stopped being a good show about 5 years into the Next Generation and we had 2 more of that, 6 or 7 of DS9 and the same from Voyager. And now we are into the second season of the same thing with Enterprise. Maybe Joss would have done better to call his show Star Trek: Firefly. He could ride out 5 seasons with that alone.

Knowing the terrible run around that Fox gave Joss, I doubt we will see what he was really envisioning until the middle of the season when his pilot airs.

Maybe he will be like George Lucas and make the villian at the end stumble into the engine on his own without Mal's help. Like it was supposed to happen!

Phil

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Fox shat on 'Undeclared' and 'The Tick', so I expect nothing good from them.

As far as giving Trek shows a chance, I watched 'Enterprise' for 4 eps then quit. I gave it another chance with the season-ender and the 2nd season premiere, but I don't see myself sticking with it for more than another ep or 2.

 

[TheLongshot]

It's funny that some people, me among them, will give an average sci-fi show like Enterprise more than a season to prove it's worth. Yet with Firefly some people don't want to give the thing more than a couple of episodes. SO how long would we give it with the ST brand? Or are we happier to watch a show when we know it'll be around for 7 years? At least Firefly will have to earn a full/2nd season.

It has more to do that people have a history with Trek, so any Trek show is going to get the benefit of the doubt from Trek fans. Same with JMS fans and Crusade or Jeremiah. The same will be true of Joss fans. I'm sure most will faithfully watch the show all season.

It is those of us who are not members of these groups that don't have as much invested in it. For us, if it doesn't grab on, why should we waste time with more than a couple of episodes?

BTW, I have already given up on Enterprise. I only went out of the way to watch the premere, and watch other episodes if I was home, and wasn't impressed.

Jason

 

[LarryDavenport]

What's Legend?

 

[Neil_S]

I kept thinking I was watching Brisco County, Jr.
Where is Bruce? We need Bruce!!

Overall, I liked it. Especially the subtle but sarcastic humor.. Much like Stargate SG-1. At the end I too was thinking "Oh great. This is setting up a long running plot line of the bad guy trying to find the crew." I was pleasantly surprised by the outcome

 

[Jason Seaver]

What's Legend?

A "Gadget Western" a la "Wild Wild West" and "Brisco" that ran on UPN for a few months. Starred Richard Dean Anderson (when he was still squeamish about using a gun) and John de Lancie, was written by former Star Trek guy Mike Piller, and featured probably a few more Trek in-jokes than was good for it. It had some charm, like Anderson's authentic Old West facial hair, but suffered by being too soon after "Brisco" and not nearly as good.

 

[Michael St. Clair]

Other than at least a few weeks of a show you enjoyed. It's not like Fox is notably worse than other networks in this regard.

Personally, I think Fox has a knack for putting great shows in a very wrong time slot and/or promoting them in the wrong manner. Worse than other networks.

Of course, this is subjective and we can argue it until we are blue in the face.

 

[Jason Seaver]

I guess the point I was trying to make was that I'd rather have Fox than ABC or UPN, neither of which makes much of an attempt to actually make great (or at least non-derivative) shows.

Of course, I'd rather Fox had marketers as good as their series-development people (who are, generally, remarkably good/daring), too. That Fox puts good shows on, to me, greatly outweighs that they have a hard time selling them.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Is it that Fox is canceling great shows more than any other network or is it that Fox is overall trying more great shows then any other network? I mean, for a lot of people, Alias is the only reason they watch ABC. Likewise, I couldn't care less about NBC if it weren't for Will & Grace and ER. CBS is at least making an attempt to break free of their image as a stodgy old station for old people. But Fox as the newest of the Big Four generates every season more great pilots that any other network. There's countless shows that have failed and countless more that have done well that I have loved over the years. The WB is starting to do some great stuff too, but still nothing with the versatility of Fox. As for UPN, they spend the bulk of their programming devoted to a perceived "urban" audience, with resultant shows that are little better than the blaxplotation films of the 70's. The only good comedy they had, "The Hughleys" (which actually benefitted from UPN's nothing-to-lose attitude over former host ABC's oppressive family restrictions) was canceled after last season. (Fox, in turn, caters to the African American audience instead of insulting it. Bernie Mac is a very watchable show, and Cedric the Entertainer is supposed to be decent as well.) The only show I'm even remotely interested in this season is the Twilight Zone, and if it doesn't blow me away in the next two episodes, that's done to "Birds of Prey."

To sum it all up, Fox consistently tries more interesting and diverse programming than any other network. They should be commended for trying, not disparaged for the inevitable cancellation.

 

[Nigel McN]

The Show was certainly interesting enough for me to watch a few more.

 

[Phil Florian]

I wonder what Ben Edlund's role is (I mean, beyond Producer) with Firefly? How much has he contributed to the process? Certainly the show felt like a Joss show and not some composite between Joss and Tick. Is he going to pen stuff or just produce? In Joss shows, people usually do multiple roles be it producing, directing, and as with Buffy the Musical, singing and dancing (honest). Being a big fan of at least the animated Tick (the live show, while nice to look at didn't really match the same level as the animated or comic book) it would be nice to see Ben's stamp on the show.

Maybe Jayne will yell "Spoooooon!" when he jumps into combat the next time.


Phil