Why Was Firefly a Good TV Show?

[PatboyX]

i just recently watched the full series. id heard of it but never really cared. buddy of mine was really pushing it and after a month of that and a broke down car i gave it a go.
i know nothing of this joss fellow who created it. i had to imdb him and then i realized why so many people where going on about the show before it even aired (when i was in college a few years back, a friend of mine there would walk around with a firefly hat, he explained it to me as a "sci-fi western" to which i could only respond "that sounds lame")
that being said, i think its a pretty solid show. i can understand the whole "i dont like western" thing. i was never a huge fan. ill watch the odd john wayne film and catch a western here and there but they tend to be a little slow on the plot and a little heavy on the machismo for me. this show, though, doesnt take itself too seriously but doesnt collapse under the weight of the irony, humor or down-right implausiblity that plauges many science fictions shows. while i think that the die-hard fans can be a turn-off to the causal tv viewer (as can the chronology and lack of apparent proper airing) i think that if this show had "star trek" or "star wars" tacked onto the front of the name, it would have been given a much better chance of surviving. and it is certainly more interesting than any of the recent star trek and star wars franchise moves.
it very much owes a lot of its writing and style to pulp, which i love. there is an aspect of serious character development that is so lacking in television it almost makes me want to sign an online petition. i like the idea that they actually thought about backstory to create this universe and while our heroes constantly escape certain doom and pretty much all fights with healable ails (thank you Future Deus Ex Machina for fixing all wounds unless dealt to our enemies) the writers certainly throw enough cliches under the bus to allow the most steadfast ones to get by without too much notice.
anyway, id suggest giving it a try. worse comes to worse, you are a member of this board and if you dont know anyone in real life that would dig it as a second hand gift, i bet you could get a good return on it in FS/T.

 

[Gl4di4tor]

I watched upto ep 10 or so, then i just got bored and stoped dling it. Western theme was kinda lame.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Czar
The good:
- Good characters
- Potential for a fantastic storyline

The bad:
- The stupid western theme
- The stupid western theme
- The stupid western theme
- The western theme made no sense
- Whyyyy a fscking western theme!!!
- One episode could be a complete western rippoff while the next one could be propper scifi

What exactly about the western theme is unlikeable to you? Do you suspect that when man ventures into space and begins to colonize other worlds that they'll all magically become bastions of technology and paradise?

Say what you want about the western theme, but I'd be willing to bet that the new frontiers of living on new terraformed worlds will be more alike to the old west than we think, at least in the early years.

Jason

I can't buy into that line of reasoning. You do not terraform a planet(massive undertaking) and then sparsely populate it with people barely making a living. There is always a definite deveopement plan. One reclaims land from the ocean just to let it sit there undeveloped. If it a planet with a pre-exisitng terran environment then I can see how there would be limited habitation and construction.

Ah, yes, because humankind has SO much experience with the terraforming of other worlds that you can claim knowledge of exactly what the plan is, how well it's developed and how far it goes.

Somehow I think YOUR line of reasoning is what's flawed in this post.

Jason

At least explain how my reasoning is flawed other then just a simple dissmissive sentance. :roll:

The way I see it is no one pours the foundation for a skyscraper(terraforming) then decided to switch gears and build a shack in place of it instead, without extenuating circumstances. I'n not advocating there should be shiny, gleeming spires but the worlds other then the alliance seem abnormally low-tech.

See, I'm not seeing that they were abnormally low tech at all. The story is pretty clear that a handful of the "core planets", the ones really close to each other, were heavily colonized first, and then people started moving out to the remote planets. Supposing you've only got a few thousand people who move out to a remote area (suppose they go because they want to get away from the big civilization and just live quiet lives. Suppose a particular sect of religion wants to be separate from the mass of man and the dominance of technology because they believe it weakens their spirituality. Or maybe they're just reclusive and don't want to live in a populated area!) I see no reason why you'd have much more than the basics. Everyone's got to start *somewhere*, and not everyone's got the resources to settle down on a new piece of land and build themselves a set of condos.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: Queasy

I can't remember from which episode it was but there was a line where the Captain explains that the Alliance terraforms a planet/moon and then dumps a number of settlers there with just enough to get by.

Was there an explantion given, why the alliance did that?

You may remember that in the early days of the US, when we were busy settling the wide open spaces, the government would give land grants to people. You may recall the phrase "20 acres and a mule". They'd grant them their parcel of land, toss them some basic supplies and then they were on their own. A reasonable person wouldn't *expect* to be given a fully built home and a nice city to live in for absolutely nothing. The people on the remote worlds in Firefly are very much synonymous with the pioneers and settlers who were slowly moving west during the "manifest destiny" period of the United States early years. There's nothing unreasonable about that presentation in Firefly, it has historical precedent.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: DarkKnight69
Firefly was a good tv show???!?!?!?!?!

The only Sci-Fi on television that's been as good as or better than Firefly since that show was on is Battlestar Galactica.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: scorpmatt

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: scorpmatt
I love the western theme that they threw into the mix with the sci-fi.

Firefly reminds me of sci-fi where it didn't have aliens and that stuff. Like HG Wells and the other authors that wrote sci-fi when it was good.

And about the terraforming crap. Look at government in general, they want to help people but they use rich and stuffy people to decide what is best. Yeah, the line "They terraform a planet then drop settlers on it" seems to be cruel but governments have done things like this before. Make it habitable and then send people there to survive.

Yep. It's alot like the colonization of America. The first settlers had it rough mostly because of the time it took to get from Europe to North America. The same concept applies to the Firefly universe (I think)....vast distances between the core planets and the rest.

Yup and that is explained a bit in the movie Serenity. Which iirc ends season and goes through season 2. The story is 7 seasons long. Hopefully UNiversal is going to make the other 2 movies then start the tv show up.

Umm, how do we know the story is 7 seasons long? I just did a quick google and I couldn't find a word about Joss Whedon saying anything of the sort. Are you assuming that, based on the fact that Buffy ran for 7 seasons?

Jason

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: Queasy

I can't remember from which episode it was but there was a line where the Captain explains that the Alliance terraforms a planet/moon and then dumps a number of settlers there with just enough to get by.

Was there an explantion given, why the alliance did that?

You may remember that in the early days of the US, when we were busy settling the wide open spaces, the government would give land grants to people. You may recall the phrase "20 acres and a mule". They'd grant them their parcel of land, toss them some basic supplies and then they were on their own. A reasonable person wouldn't *expect* to be given a fully built home and a nice city to live in for absolutely nothing. The people on the remote worlds in Firefly are very much synonymous with the pioneers and settlers who were slowly moving west during the "manifest destiny" period of the United States early years. There's nothing unreasonable about that presentation in Firefly, it has historical precedent.

Jason

i think that this show has a lot more valid and intelligent thought and design placed into its creation than many other sci-fi shows that endevour to explore an new universe (to us, the viewer) i think that it doesnt shove the information into quick exposition and tries to keep consistancy. its sort of refreshing in american television.
the fact that its sci-fi limits its audience as does the western theme but i think this has a whole lot more though than the majority of science fiction being aired.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: Queasy

I can't remember from which episode it was but there was a line where the Captain explains that the Alliance terraforms a planet/moon and then dumps a number of settlers there with just enough to get by.

Was there an explantion given, why the alliance did that?

You may remember that in the early days of the US, when we were busy settling the wide open spaces, the government would give land grants to people. You may recall the phrase "20 acres and a mule". They'd grant them their parcel of land, toss them some basic supplies and then they were on their own. A reasonable person wouldn't *expect* to be given a fully built home and a nice city to live in for absolutely nothing. The people on the remote worlds in Firefly are very much synonymous with the pioneers and settlers who were slowly moving west during the "manifest destiny" period of the United States early years. There's nothing unreasonable about that presentation in Firefly, it has historical precedent.

Jason

i think that this show has a lot more valid and intelligent thought and design placed into its creation than many other sci-fi shows that endevour to explore an new universe (to us, the viewer) i think that it doesnt shove the information into quick exposition and tries to keep consistancy. its sort of refreshing in american television.
the fact that its sci-fi limits its audience as does the western theme but i think this has a whole lot more though than the majority of science fiction being aired.

Agreed. The only sci-fi on television that's as good as or better than Firefly was is the new Battlestar Galactica, which is positively *brilliant*.

Jason

 

[MAME]

k

 

[SportSC4]

do you know what i don't understand?

why is it that everytime their is some supposed future that the people are wearing button upped no collar shirts, shiny clothing, skin tight clothing, robes or some mix and match of that? i mean, compared to the early 1900's, we're dressed way down with those people.

i only saw the movie (which is pretty good btw) but it makes more sense to me that they wear clothing that fits their environment than some "futurist" looking crap. cowboys in "wild" america (those that raise steer, cows, etc) wear clothing similar to what cowbows wore 150 years ago, just slight differences, right? if something takes place in some badlands, i would imagine that the attitude would be similar to when people began coming to the ex-badlands of the usa (westward, ho!).

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: Queasy

I can't remember from which episode it was but there was a line where the Captain explains that the Alliance terraforms a planet/moon and then dumps a number of settlers there with just enough to get by.

Was there an explantion given, why the alliance did that?

You may remember that in the early days of the US, when we were busy settling the wide open spaces, the government would give land grants to people. You may recall the phrase "20 acres and a mule". They'd grant them their parcel of land, toss them some basic supplies and then they were on their own. A reasonable person wouldn't *expect* to be given a fully built home and a nice city to live in for absolutely nothing. The people on the remote worlds in Firefly are very much synonymous with the pioneers and settlers who were slowly moving west during the "manifest destiny" period of the United States early years. There's nothing unreasonable about that presentation in Firefly, it has historical precedent.

Jason

sorry no it doesn't. places like australia are FREE. dumping excess population on these places was easy. the expensive job of teraforming new planets which may hold vast new untapped resources just ripe for exploitation by a supposedly depleted home planet is SO not even similar. an advanced civilization capable of such feats wouldn't let such works go to waste. and no, its not horribly far far away...fireflies ship cows around for f*ck sake.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: SportSC4
do you know what i don't understand?

why is it that everytime their is some supposed future that the people are wearing button upped no collar shirts, shiny clothing, skin tight clothing, robes or some mix and match of that? i mean, compared to the early 1900's, we're dressed way down with those people.

i only saw the movie (which is pretty good btw) but it makes more sense to me that they wear clothing that fits their environment than some "futurist" looking crap. cowboys in "wild" america (those that raise steer, cows, etc) wear clothing similar to what cowbows wore 150 years ago, just slight differences, right? if something takes place in some badlands, i would imagine that the attitude would be similar to when people began coming to the ex-badlands of the usa (westward, ho!).

no, the clothing of the west evolved on its own.. i somehow doubt it would evolve the same way twice. let alone with women wearing the same fashion for no apparent practical reason. the carbon copy western on a new planet bit is the worst part of the series.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: DragonMasterAlex

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: hdeck
because joss weddon made it.

pretty much. weddon fanboys are just nutters


and no it wasn't sufficient enough in any aspect to achieve suspension of disbelief. buncha cliches and witty remarks instead of substance. paper thin characters, lame predictable plots, really poor acting, a universe that was absurd. hooker with a heart of gold... GROUND BREAKING stuff. and the whole expending the massive resources to create space travel + massive teraforming projects just so u can open a few whore houses in the new wild wild west is just stupid. oh yes, don't send any tech or knowledge to the new planets, that would be cheating start from nothin.

fox did the world a favor. i watched the dvd because of all the yapping about how great it was. theres nothing there folks, just a failed tacky second rate scifi series with a stupid looking ship to boot.

the dvds been out for 2 years now and the movie bombed anyways. that should tell you something.

Wow, talk about someone who fails entirely to see the merit of a show For starters, there weren't that many cliche's really. Yeah, the whore with the heart of gold was pretty cliche, but well done (and she was da *hawwwtness* . The idea that not every planet was completely high-tech, lush, green and gorgeous was a *great* idea, far better than the craptacular Star Trek universe where everyone lives in ultra high-tech comfort with pristine landscaping, clean clothes and an amicable outlook on life. Given that we're talking about a story in which roughly 70 worlds had been terraformed, it's entirely reasonable to believe that not all would be highly developed. On earth alone there are *plenty* of places you can go, little country towns and whatnot, that aren't *remotely* as developed as, say, New York or Los Angeles.

If you want the poorly written, unimaginative variety of Sci-Fi where everything is clean and perfect, go visit Star Trek.

Jason

no ones asking for completely high tech lush green gorgeous planets. its bs to pretend all scifi is like that anyways. as i said, this was in no way ground breaking or new. look at cowboy bebop which it basically ripped off while somehow missing out on all of the style... does every planet on stargate/stargate atlantis look like a perfect future? of course not. heck you aren't even right about star trek where they actually visit many sh*t level planets. the ones that tend to achieve the costly and very high tech space travel thing do tend to be advanced because well.... it kinda f*cking makes sense doesn't it. the only time human civilization devolves and loses knowledge is when massive amounts of people are whipped out and cannot escape with anything, are isolated, and all knowledge is lost. flying through space in advanced colony ships doesn't match this situation at all. let alone with intersteller trade. much technology that would make colony building and just life more efficient would be brought along. scientific knowledge could fit on a single computer. its not as if they lug around huge books or something. frankly large corporations or nations would be there first setting up systems to exploit the resourses of the new planets if they were worth the whole effort of teraforming in the first place. its all plain absurd. weddon fans just dont seem to understand scifi at all. heck ..much of scifi is very dark view of the future. blade runner anyone? green and lush my ass.

With regard to ST, at least, you're full of it. 99% of civilizations encountered in that craptacular series (which has continuously gone downhill since TNG) have advanced societies, interstellar travel, big fancy ships, etc. As for other Sci-Fi, yes, I realize that much of it is a darker view of the future with the angle that Technology will destroy mankind. You don't *have* to follow that pattern to be genuine sci-fi. In any event, the case is never made in Firefly/Serenity that humankind has "devolved", nor anything of the sort. The case is made that people are still early in the colonization of worlds other than earth (in historic terms, of course; 500 years isn't very damn long), that people go to some of these remote worlds for different reasons and they make a living the best they can. It's no different than humans have been when breaching any new frontier; you can't always just bring everything you need with you, some things you've got to do from scratch and use the materials that are available to you.

Your argument is more of an anti-Whedon argument than anything else. Nobody ever said the man was perfect or could do no wrong, just that he writes well and comes up with unique ideas or unique variations on existing ideas.

Jason

if you knew anything about sci fi you would remember the prime directive. its why they don't spend their time dealing with primitive civilizations. makes sense doesn't it? and sorry, the job of teraforming planets and colonization would be like another moon mission/space race. the expenditure would garrantee that there would be massive planning behind the effort and its results and the resources to be found would be exploited to the hilt by the government and corporations. sorry, the way the colonization works in firefly a carbon copy of how colonization worked hundreds of years ago. no consideration on how things have changed for today, let alone into the future when we suposedly could teraform a swath of planets. not very well thought out at all.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Bateluer
Storyline, great cast and crew, uniqueness, outstanding music score.

Watch the complete series, its only 14 eps, before making a judgement of whether or not the series was good.

My wife and I have watched the first 6 or 7 episodes and have really enjoyed it so far, for the same reasons you've mentioned.

Typical of Fox to cancel it... very few good shows remain on that channel.

I think the whole anti-Western attitude comes from people expecting all space shows to be like Star Trek. Don't get me wrong, I like Star Trek, but its nice to have original ideas too.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
and sorry, the job of teraforming planets and colonization would be like another moon mission/space race. the expenditure would garrantee that there would be massive planning behind the effort and its results and the resources to be found would be exploited to the hilt by the government and corporations. sorry, the way the colonization works in firefly a carbon copy of how colonization worked hundreds of years ago. no consideration on how things have changed for today, let alone into the future when we suposedly could teraform a swath of planets. not very well thought out at all.

It depends on the cost of terraforming planet numbers 50-100 not the first few. In Firefly the inner worlds are highly developed.

Imagine cheap terraforming of near-Earth worlds, by dumping packages of biological agents and/or self-replicating nannites and coming back after a century when the job is done.

Or imagine a collection of worlds that were scheduled for development before the civil war, by corporations that no longer exist and perhaps for settlers that died in the war.

Or imagine worlds setup up to grow pharmaceuticals or extract minerals where changing needs make the crops or minerals much less valuable, so the company abandons the workers to fend for themselves.

It's not too hard to come up with plausible scenarios to support the Firefly universe, or you can just kick back and enjoy some good storytelling.

 

[0roo0roo]

thats fine and all but the fact is earth in this scifi world hasn't devolved to the point where they aren't space travelers. if the corporations abandoned planets then there would still be atleast some residual infrastructure left behind, not old wild west carbon copy towns. if private parties can make the long journeys to the outer planets, so should governments or corporations. much less by a private ship maintained by a self taught mechanic... u see...space travel is EASY!!! lol and it still doesn't explain the carbon copy nature of the outer worlds which is just too absurd. and well the stories are pretty shabby and predictable too, which makes the rest all the more unforgivable.

 

[EatSpam]

I also like the total lack of techno-babble. I know I'm not going to run across a crappy "holodeck" episode as I finish the show.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I also like the total lack of techno-babble. I know I'm not going to run across a crappy "holodeck" episode as I finish the show.

But using a sensor dish to emit hydrogen is good science!

And inverting the polarity really can fix anything!

But what happens when you mix chronoton and tachyon particle fields?

Star Trek is the poster child for laughable science written by Hollywood techno-illiterates, though TOS, TNG and DS9 were all entertaining.