Joss Whedon on Buffy reboot

Mr Skeletor wrote:

Firefly was a pooer man's farscape. At best.

At least with Buffy the hype makes some level of sense. Firefly is raved about for episodes that were never even created.

Farscape sucks so, so hard. Fuck all those lameass looking aliens, fuck that flat, douchebag lead actor, fuck everything about it. Farscape is nothing more than a buffet table of cheesy, unbearable TV sci-fi stereotypes. I tried so hard to get into that show until I finally said fuck it, it just flat-out BLOWS. Firefly has heart. It's a simple of that. If you don't like it but do like Farscape, I'm not surprised.

And in all my years of being a Firefly fan, I've never once heard anyone rave about it for episodes never made. What the fuck does that even mean? Skelly, you should stick to what you know best: Shitty games like Runebound based in the bland, generic Terrinoth setting and, apparently, shitty TV sci-fi shows that beautifully illustrate why the people who watch them never have sex unpaid for.

Sagrilarus wrote:

He writes the best dialogue on TV.

what?! i liked firefly but: what?!

Sagrilarus wrote:
" I tried to get into Farscape two or three times and just couldn't get hooked."
A friend couldn't either, because Crichton wasn't heroic. Which is true, the character starts out as an idiot and a jerk. But he does grow over time.

Josh Look wrote:
" Farscape sucks so, so hard. Fuck all those lameass looking aliens, fuck that flat, douchebag lead actor, fuck everything about it. Farscape is nothing more than a buffet table of cheesy, unbearable TV sci-fi stereotypes. I tried so hard to get into that show until I finally said fuck it, it just flat-out BLOWS. Firefly has heart. It's a simple of that. If you don't like it but do like Farscape, I'm not surprised."
Tried so hard, huh? And such hate. So are you a masochist?
I don't dislike Firefly. What little I read sounded so mediocre that I've never watched it due to supreme indifference.

Notahandle wrote:

Tried so hard, huh? And such hate. So are you a masochist?
I don't dislike Firefly. What little I read sounded so mediocre that I've never watched it due to supreme indifference.

Farscape was recommended to me time and time again, I watched it, and I had to ask, "Is there something I'm missing?" I have a rule that I have to give a show at least 3 or 4 episodes before I make any real judgement on it, and those 3-4 episodes were a STRUGGLE. Hence, the try so hard.

So let me get this straight....you've never watched it? Because it's way better than it sounds on paper. I never watched it until after seeing the movie (not knowing it was ever a TV show), but I remember not being all that thrilled about the concept either. Plus, it was TV sci-fi, which I avoid like plague.

Josh, just watch the first episode of Firefly. You'll be amazed at what you've been missing. As for Joss being a brilliant writer, I think he is. But in as so far as he created the setting, and the tone/personality/humor of the show. I think any decent writer can keep it going now. Actually the episodes were written by around 2 or 3 writers.

I think one way I would describe Firefly is: The Han Solo Series. Han was always my favorite character from Star Wars. Firefly expands that idea of space smugglers and does away with the aliens, warpdrives, teleportation, laser guns, and goes for a more "believable" Sci-Fi. Firefly is adventure. Kind of like Indiana Jones in space, but with a different, better cast. Battlestar Galactica is good, but its more of a soap IMO.

I can't comment on Farscape but if someone who hates Firefly loves it, I doubt it's my cup of tea.

On a tangent. Some months back when Red Dead Redemption came out, there was a thread asking which were the best westerns. I was surprised to see someone listing The Young Guns movies at the top of their list. I had never seen them because always had this image in my head that these movies were extremely cheesy. Due that person ranking them so high I went ahead and gave them a try a couple of weeks ago. I frickin' loved them!!! They were not that cheesy after all. The only weird thing is that is has rock music where there should be a proper score, but those movies are really good!

That was me, and yes the Young Guns films are better than people remember (but in a cheesy 80's kind of way).

Regulators, mount up!

Josh Look wrote:

Farscape sucks so, so hard. Fuck all those lameass looking aliens, fuck that flat, douchebag lead actor, fuck everything about it. Farscape is nothing more than a buffet table of cheesy, unbearable TV sci-fi stereotypes. I tried so hard to get into that show until I finally said fuck it, it just flat-out BLOWS. Firefly has heart. It's a simple of that. If you don't like it but do like Farscape, I'm not surprised.

And in all my years of being a Firefly fan, I've never once heard anyone rave about it for episodes never made. What the fuck does that even mean? Skelly, you should stick to what you know best: Shitty games like Runebound based in the bland, generic Terrinoth setting and, apparently, shitty TV sci-fi shows that beautifully illustrate why the people who watch them never have sex unpaid for.

See notahandle, this deranged jackassedness illustrates very aptly the kind of brain damage firefly fandom causes. This guy sounds like raving fanatical lunatic – over a series that had what, 16 mediocre episodes?

Yes, Farscape had muppets. I have to wonder what kind of idiot considers that an insult? Muppets are the mastercraft in puppetry which will (since we now have CGI) never be beaten. They are a sign of absolute heart and quality, and Joss Whendon frankly wishes he was half the man Jim Henson was. So yes, Farscape had muppets, which is a positive thing.

“And in all my years of being a Firefly fan, I've never once heard anyone rave about it for episodes never made. What the fuck does that even mean?”

I’ll explain it to you. You see what happens here, and I know this because I have spoken to your cult like clan many a time, is I go through every silly claim that the shitcoats make and prove it’s either false or farscape did it better. But then you shitcoats start ranting that I’m “not being fair” because farscape had 4 years, and firefly had only half a year, and all that stuff like “character development” was going to come later. It always comes down to praising what the show “was going to do” rather than what it actually did. In other words, episodes that exist in shotcoats’ heads that were never made.

Then again the best argument is that I apparently pay for sex and play Runebound, so I guess it’s become apparent even to you that you are defending a turd.

Firefly does not have brilliant writing – it has a bunch of characters who all talk in the same voice – Whedonspeak. Set up, smart assed line, set up, smartassed line. Add cows and spaceships to 2 and a half men and there you go, it’s firefly.

Then we get to the awesomely cleche characters:

Han solo ripoff captain. Boring.
The chick 2nd in command and her goofy husband pilot. This was a new setup so I’ll pay those two.
Jane, the ‘evil’ doctor smith style character in the group who was really a goofball with a heart of gold. Yeah, never seen that before. What a fucking stupid character.
Book the wise priest who has a hidden secret. Similar to Zhaan, except Zhaan actually did bad shit and had dimension. Book just hinted at his ‘bad past’ and did nothing the whole show but play the mystical negro.
BORING BORING BORING Hooker with a heart of gold. This is seriously the shittiest character I have ever seen in TV. If you are going to put a hooker in a show she needs to act like a hooker, this chick may as well have been a waitress for all the depth her profession gave her.
Mechanic Chick, the only character I liked.
Some boring ‘mystery experiment’ chick they were all the rage when this show came out, and her boring ass ‘good protective guy’ brother.

Not much originality there. Or depth. Lots of them spoke with irony though.

The plots were all western plots and as a result were pretty filler. No sci-fi headfuck plots like farscape had, or anything with any real originality. The villains were shit, cannibal zombies which you never saw, an ‘empire’ who were fucking boring (peacekeepers were way more interesting) and one shot goons and shit who sucked. The only exception was the black guy in the last episode, he was a great villain. If you want to watch an episode watch that one notahandle, don’t bother with the rest unless you are bored as you are not missing much.

It didn’t push the genre like farscape, or have its complexities, intelligence, depth or its heart. To be fair though it was only 16 episodes long (then again, so was Rome and that shit all over firefly.)

The black guy in the Serenity movie is the best Villan ever. All the characters were great. I will say that the actor who played Simon was not up to par with the rest. And I agree that muppets/miniatures are way cooler than CGI. I would not call the writing "smart ass" lines. Those "smart ass" lines are a big part of what made the show great. The characters often times commented and reacted in ways that a regular Joe would. Not like the typical Hollywood/TV cliches. I guess you are just a ardent Firefly hater. It's alright though, "some people juggle geese."

People react by swearing in Chinese?
Sorry, I find all of Joss' writing very stilted. It did fit buffy though. Supposed space smugglers, not so much.

Josh Look wrote:
" Farscape was recommended to me time and time again, I watched it, and I had to ask, "Is there something I'm missing?" I have a rule that I have to give a show at least 3 or 4 episodes before I make any real judgement on it, and those 3-4 episodes were a STRUGGLE. Hence, the try so hard."
Okay, I can understand that, I usually give a three episode chance as well.

" So let me get this straight....you've never watched it? Because it's way better than it sounds on paper. I never watched it until after seeing the movie (not knowing it was ever a TV show), but I remember not being all that thrilled about the concept either."
Nope, never watched Firefly. But then, there's very little I watch on TV. I've had to think hard to remember what I last watched: it was the BBC three episode series Sherlock, which would have been round about July. Normally, I'll just pull out a DVD. Occasionally I buy something new because I've seen it in the past and liked it (usually after someone's recommended it).

" Plus, it was TV sci-fi, which I avoid like plague."
Agreed. Trouble is, film's rarely much better.

Mr Skeletor wrote:
" ...over a series that had what, 16 mediocre episodes?"
Only eleven according to wikipedia.

" So yes, Farscape had muppets, which is a positive thing."
Yep, that added to it's charm. I actually felt that Rigel had more character than Crichton, which says something about the quality of the writing.

" No sci-fi headfuck plots like farscape had"
That is definitely one of Farscapes strongpoints. (That and sheer quirkiness.)

" If you want to watch an episode watch that one notahandle, don’t bother with the rest unless you are bored as you are not missing much."
So far no one's said anything to convince me to watch Firefly.

Notahandle wrote:

Mr Skeletor wrote:
" ...over a series that had what, 16 mediocre episodes?"
Only eleven according to wikipedia.

Wiki would be right. There you go, 11 episodes and its the greateast show of all time. Give me a fucking break.

" So yes, Farscape had muppets, which is a positive thing."
Yep, that added to it's charm. I actually felt that Rigel had more character than Crichton, which says something about the quality of the writing.[/quote]

Hmm, dunno if I'd agree with that. Maybe initially (Crichton is kind of boring at the start of the series when he is just the 'everyman' character) but Rigel, who was my favourite, was often picked on for being the last character that they started developing and giving a personality arc too. Crichton on the other hand got one of the best lead character arcs in a story I have seen.

Farscape is a great show, the muppets add a lot of charm and were the main reason I took the time to watch it in the first place (unfortunately there's not enough of them). It has a sense of humor about itself and seems to be aware that it's a T.V. show. But the main villian in the first season is no more convincing as a great villian, nor any more original a concept as a villian then either the villian in Serenity, or any of the episodes of Firefly for that matter. All through I kept hoping that I wouldn't see the evil empire because I preferred the episodes were they encountered new worlds and people.

Firefly's greatest strength is that it only lasted for a few shows. I mean that sincerely as a big fan of the show. It leaves things only half resolved, because it's nice to continually speculate, and it's forced to wrap up what it can in a reasonably timely fashion. A movie is too long when it goes to three hours but people sit through the same T.V. show for days on end without complaining. The show 24 is a perfect example, each season takes roughly a day to watch... fucking crazy. I find Firefly to be a refreshing length, long enough for some development of a few main stories yet short enough to maintain some mystery to the world and avoid over exposure.

Farscape goes on, and on, and on...

Farscape cast:

American Pilot, young cocky, good lookin, smart... never seen that character before.
New Age Alien chick, like any corny new age chick in any other show from Sex in the City to Star Trek's Diana Troy... BUT SHE"S BLUE!!!
Warf knock off
Little gross alien on a hover plate, Archie Bunker in space, and probably my favorite character
Conflicted hot chick now made an enemy by those she served, forced to confront her past always wearing oodles of makeup and occasionally making out with the American Pilot. hmmmm brand new!

Neither show has original characters and even the idea's are all re-tread of sci-fi shit that's been in novels for years and years.

It's all about execution. Fuck everyone should know that. Originality don't mean shit in a world were people have been constantly re-telling the same basic stories with the same basic character types for thousands of years.

to quote Deep Purple, it's not the kill, it's the thrill of the chase.

The characters in Farscape develop and there are some nice surprises as well as many forced moments and soap opera emotional arcs and it's humor doesn't hit home as often as Firefly's does. Firefly's Jane's Town episode is funnier then any episode Farscape ever did, and they had four seasons to do it.

I don't see how anyone could watch both and see this huge disparity between two relatively similar and enjoyable shows. They're both very self aware and full of humor, they both focus on outlaws, and they're both sci fi T.V. shows of roughly similar budgets and creative teams.

Farscape has the benefit of exploring the unknown and being really imaginative (plus muppets!!) and Firefly has a sharper script and doesn't overstay it's welcome.

Buffy and Angel can lick my ass, I can't even sit through the episodes at all, don't know why, don't care to find out.

But I did like that quote from Whedon, it's pretty funny and sounds reasonable and human. I also kind of liked his X-men run, but it's embarrassing to admit it.

No you are all wrong. Captain Kirk would totally kick Picard's ass.

JonJacob wrote:

It's all about execution. Fuck everyone should know that. Originality don't mean shit in a world were people have been constantly re-telling the same basic stories with the same basic character types for thousands of years.

This is something I strongly stand behind. Not everything needs to set itself out to reinvent the wheel. It's the same complaint I'm constantly hearing about The Walking Dead. No, it doesn't add anything new to the genre, but so fucking what? I'm watching zombies on TV, the storytelling is good, so why bitch?

With Firefly, I'll be the first to admit that if the show is doing something that hasn't been done in a sci-fi before, then it's been done in a Western. Yeah, I know it's Han Solo the series. But I'm okay with that. It packs a ton of plot, wit, humor, and warmth into just under an hour. The other thing that Joss does beautifully is set up situations where you expect it to tread some sort of cliche and do the complete opposite. I'm not just talking about his taste for killing characters.

His sarcastic and too-witty-for-his-own-good flavor may not be for everyone, but hey, that's why we have dumbed down hacks like Zack Snyder out there for those folks.