Serenity (2005) (1 Viewer)

[Tino]

I'm curious. I haven't seen any of the recent Star Trek movies (with the next generation cast) but how good were they with being "stand-alone" movies?

Imo, the Star Trek TNG films work fine as stand alone films.

 

[Joel C]

As a fan of the series, I generally liked the film, certainly more than Tino, even if I think fans are wildly overpraising it simply because it's the only Firefly they're going to get... But I also totally agree that it made as much at the box-office as it ever could, just as I think the show's ~4 millions viewers were about it as well.

When the movie was first announced, I figured it would top out at $30 million, so $25 seems about right.

 

[Quentin]

He is the best character in the film. I also like Mal more now that I've watched the show. I like Fillion too, but unfortunately he is no big screen leading man.
Sorry you didn't like it more, Tino. I actually do think it is written pretty well. Better than any Star Trek film save 2 and maybe 6.
But, it is a low budgeter in both scale/scope and look.

 

[Patrick Sun]

BTW, it's Adam Baldwin (Jayne) in the film, not Daniel Baldwin (he of the clan Baldwin that spawned Stephen, Alec, Billy, and Daniel).

 

[Robert Ringwald]

I can certainly see now why the film failed due to it appealing mostly to Firefly fans I believe.

Yet most of the critics gave it high praise and called it very enjoyable, and the people that saw it mostly praised it as well (not just firefly fans).

In fact, a lot of the firefly people DID NOT like the movie because they felt it was too dark and didn't focus as much on the characters.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I'll offer that the opening night viewing of Serenity (Sept. 30, 2005) was the best theatrical viewing I've attended in about a decade. Sure, I was surrounded by Browncoats (being one myself, I didn't mind), and I was simply amazed at the reactions of the fans to this film. The audience was so into this film, and the laughter, the gasps and the sadness expressed were geniune and heartfelt, just a great communal film-watching experience for me.

I won't offer up any excuses as to whether or not Serenity should be held up to the standard of standalone film. Now that it's on DVD, there's little excuse not to have see Firefly first, but sometimes, people are just late to the gravy train. Can't please everyone. Won't even try.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The first time I saw Serenity was at the Boston press screening and that ranks high on my list of theater experiences as well. As a ploy to draw critics into it, they flooded the theater with browncoats that got free passes by buying one of the Serenity comic books at the comic book shop on Commonwealth Ave.

Crowd reacted perfectly to everything, and at the end one fan jumped up and screamed "Fuck you, George Lucas!" to the screen, which I think the Globe reviewer noted in his review. I'm a prequel fan, and even I was swept up in the enthusiasm behind it.

 

[Chris]

It is kind of the anti-Lucas film. But actually, Firefly reminds me a bit of "Wild, Wild West" (the original TV show, not the crap movie), just a well realized idea. I enjoyed the film a good deal.

It is "low rent" but hey, really, who needs super-high-budget SciFi all the time? Some of the best SciFi I can remember was "low-rent", and I enjoyed it all the same.

I disagree with Tino on many points, but agree on one: the Villain in this movie was the perfect terrifying villain.. a bad guy who recognized he was bad, but felt as though his evil deeds were necessary for the good of the whole... that was genious in it's writing. I was very impressed with that turn, and I thought it made the character compelling.

 

[Tino]

Now that it's on DVD, there's little excuse not to have see Firefly first

Sure there is. How about not wanting to buy the whole series just to catch up. They don't rent Firefly the series near me and I feel that, although it probably would have perhaps made me enjoy Serenity more, I shouldn't have to invest the time and money for a film that should work on its own.

If I can hunt down the series, I will watch it. I'm mildly interested in seeing if it will change my mind regarding the film.

 

[Patrick Sun]

It's a given that it's bound to be a uphill battle for those not familiar with the TV show Firefly to fully enjoy Serenity on anything other than a cursory, superficial level. It's kinda like watching Star Wars Episode VI: RotJ first and wondering what all the hoopla is about. Oh well.

 

[Shawn_KE]

Well I finally rented this last night. I've read how everyone said this movie was great and was disrespected buy Universal. Having never watched the TV show, I didn't know what to think.
I didn't care for it. It was like watching a made for TV show on Scifi Channel. Mal was alright, but I could care less about everyone else. And the River character was too cliche.
I wanted and tried to like it, but it just didn't work out. Guess I shouldn't have made the wife put back The Machinist
Now don't everyone jump on me and say I should watch the series. I don't think I have to sit and watched hours of a tv series just to watch a 2 hour movie. I never saw Xfiles, but liked and understood the movie. Star Trek movies you can enjoy without the series.

 

[Tino]

It's a given that it's bound to be a uphill battle for those not familiar with the TV show Firefly to fully enjoy Serenity on anything other than a cursory, superficial level

That's my point. It shouldn't have to be an uphill battle. I think the film makers should have made more of an effort to make it more accessible to those unfamiliar with the series.

If the film had worked as a standalone film, I would be more inclined to seek out Firefly to watch the entire series. As it stands now, I'm in no rush to do so.

And if the film is an accurate representation of what the series is like, I think I'll skip it entirely.

Is it?

 

[Patrick Sun]

Judging by Firefly being high on the top selling list for Amazon, years after it was cancelled, many other new fans are seeking it out and trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. Its presence on the list has been like this even before Serenity hit the theaters. Many who are seeing Serenity for the first time (before seeing Firefly) missed the party, and while it's possible you'll not like Firefly, the show, many others have found that it has added tremendously to their viewing of Serenity for a second time and beyond. You'll never know until you try, but if you go in with a sour pre-disposition, then why bother.

For those who enjoy, witty character-driven TV shows against a backdrop of a future that allows for space travel to different worlds, where not all the worlds are futuristic and 'clean', but are gritty and unrefined, Firefly is a show for them.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Since I saw the series before the movie I can't be an accurate judge of its accessability. However, it did get a very good critical reception and I'm willing to bet that most critics had not seen the series before hand. And there have been quite a few reports of people really enjoying Serenity who had never seen the show.

To an extent I imagine you are effected if you are aware that a show existed before the film even if you never saw it. Those who didn't know this might think the movie is just taking a sort of media res approach like the original Star Wars and just go along for the rinde. But if you know that it is building off of a previous work then you probably question every line in the movie as "am I supposed to know this from the series" and not really full engage with the material.

 

[Holadem]

All this talk about seeing the series before is misleading and frankly borderline annoying.

Seeing the series is not a requirement to enjoying the movie. As Kevin said it received a good critical response. My own anecdotal evidence is the friend I watched it with, and who loved every second of it and has vowed to buy the DVD.

--

H

 

[Malcolm R]

Then you must be watching a SciFi Channel with much higher production values than the one on my dial.

 

[Patrick Sun]

True, I haven't discounted the notion that some people just don't get Whedon's style when it comes to dialogue and story structure. I think Whedon made it as accessible as possible without subjecting the audience to an hour of needless "recap" and character buildup.

I will say that the episodic TV artform allows for more richer character development over a period of episodes and story arcs, rather than films, which have to rely on cinematic shorthand to try and convey the same amount of character development in their 2-3 hour running time. Sometimes it works for film, sometimes it doesn't. The build-up of characters, and their fates can impact the viewer who has spent time with the characters, moreso than someone who has no previous exposure to them. It's this dynamic that lends itself to a richer viewing experience if there was additional exposure to the characters before seeing this film.

I expect the same to happen for the film for Harry Potter 6:

when a main character dies, but only those who read the books or watched the previous films will get the emotional brunt of the event, the person who only saw HP 6 with little exposure to the other HP books/films is less likely to really get work up with all that anguish when it happens.



At to the special effects looking subpar (Tino mentioned this his comments of the film in the software thread), the budget was around $40 million, and the F/X shots look as good as F/X in movies costing 2 to 3 times that budget amount.

 

[dailW]

it looks cheap because were used to seeing all CGI all the time. one of the things i loved about the film was that it looked cheap , that it had "bad choreography" that serenity had a bad ass chick in it.and if you think bad dialog was in this movie , i would stay away from any books by Robert Louis Stevenson , Charles dickens , and George Lucas.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

Seeing the series is not a requirement to enjoying the movie.

I watched this film over the holidays with 5 other adults. Based on the ratings here I talked it up before our viewing. Boy, was that a mistake.

After the first 45 minutes with the film not going anywhere, I was trying to save face and almost suggested turning it off. But the raves here kept me saying to myself, okay, its got to get better.

Well, it didn't. All 6 of us didn't like it and it turned out to be a poor choice. If someone is going to tell me that I need to watch the series before I can enjoy this film, well, screw that!

~Edwin

 

[Patrick Sun]

After reading your reactions/reviews to different types of film over the years, I would not have recommeded this film to you, Edwin. Sorry you got little out of it.