Saturday is Serenity Day

[coalescent]

Yes, as of yesterday the Big Damn Movie finally made it to the UK. In celebration, some links:

• Watch the first nine and a half minutes of the film here.


• Empire magazine's various features.


• Serenity around LJ: coffee_and_ink here, gadarene here, the_red_shoes here, nihilistic_kid here. My original reaction, after the preview, plus discussion, here. Spoilers all over the shop, obviously.


• A long and interesting review by Gary Westfahl (who hasn't seen Firefly) at Locus Online; Whedonesque readers comment here.


• A brief and mostly positive review from Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian.


• A glowing review from Front Row (first segment in the show).


• Interesting review in Wired.

The numbers in the US have been less than spectacular, so a sequel looks unlikely, but you never know.

EDIT: ninebelow has a poll about Book here.

And on a different note, Joss Whedon reviews Veronica Mars.

Comments

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

On a slight plus note about the box office, Serenity has held at around No. 3 up to Thursday. I still don't think it'll make its money back through theatrical grosses in the US, but it may end up turning a profit through combined US and International box office plus DVD sales.

Is that good enough to greenlight a sequel? Not so much.

(Also nice to see Gaiman & McKean's Mirrormask in there at No. 37, though that's still way short of its $4 million budget).

[alexmc.livejournal.com]

Sorry I left before the meal. There were just too many people for me to enjoy a restaurant meal. I've been to far too many meals at cons with 12+ people and it usually goes wrong.

NO SPOILERS HERE

Anyway... I think Serenity took every single criticism I had of the Firefly series and corrected it in film.

1) Not enough of the River story in the series. More in the film
2) Too much western type story. Less in the film.
3) Not enough story-arc progression per episode. Tonnes in the film.


My only irritations were

a) the quite understandable "Lets make the characters say things to introduce the other characters even if it is out of place" - whenever we met an old series character.

b) The actual geography of the universe which Firefly is set in. The distances between places seemed a bit screwy. But so long as you ignore that bit it is shiny.


I am leaving out comment on Veronice Mars as I dont really want to discuss it online. I'll chat with people in private if they really want my opinion. Currently watching episode 14. It *is* addictive and easy watching that is for sure.

[davidcook.livejournal.com]

Another discussion about Serenity and the box office results here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/theferrett/593383.html), in theferrett's LJ.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

Gary Westfahl's review is very interesting, and pinpoints most of what seemed to me to be the obvious flaws in the film (more obvious on a second viewing) while noting that the flaws don't actually stop the film from working splendidly!

He does get confused by the 2001-esque sequence which is surely of Miranda, not the Earth and the Moon, but that's an easy mistake to make. I'd also say that, despite Mal's phrasing, it's not "improving" people in the sense of technological progress that Whedon is arguing against, it's "improving" people by trying to dictate what they do and think; trying to remove their "sin". It's the well-meaning "Nanny State" taken to an extreme.

[veggiesu.livejournal.com]

I like Gary Westfahl's review - interesting to see a review from a non-Firefly viewer.

*taps foot impatiently until tomorrow afternoon*

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

There's another one here on Box Office Mojo, from a person who I can only assume is recovering from some kind of major ear trauma. Some highlights:

"more episodic (and cacophonous) than cinematic... digs in with little exposition and gets down to business and that means action — too much and too loud... Whedon does his best work with the cast, who shine in what are best described as brief bursts between assaults on one's nerve endings... an obnoxiously loud movie."

Odd.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

Jonathan Ross, perhaps predictably, loved the film. The BBC website has a highly abridged version of his Film 2005 review. The televised review went into much more detail (though one again highlighting the film's origin as a "failed " TV show, something which can only put people off).

[knirirr.livejournal.com]

Interesting, thanks.
As I posted recently, I've only seen part of the first TV episode. Perhaps that's not enough time, but some elements put me off - the sparkly drive unit, for example. If I get chance I'll see the film.

[iainjclark.livejournal.com]

You should try the link to the first nine minutes, above - it streams splendidly on our broadband connection. The first nine mins contain a lot of infodump, but are also quite cool.