Serenity (Joss Whedon, 2005)

Message

Jem · #1 Post by **Jem** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 7:27 pm

(If this has already been posted, please remove, couldn't find with search)

SYNOPSIS:
Joss Whedon writer/director responsible for the worldwide television phenomena of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel-now applies his trademark compassion and wit to a small band of galactic outcasts 500 years in the future in his feature film directorial debut, Serenity.

The film centers around Captain Malcolm Reynolds, a hardened veteran (on the losing side) of a galactic civil war, who now ekes out a living pulling off small crimes and transport-for-hire aboard his ship, Serenity. He leads a small, eclectic crew who are the closest thing he has left to family - squabbling, insubordinate and undyingly loyal.

When Mal takes on two new passengers-a young doctor and his unstable, telepathic sister-he gets much more than he bargained for. The pair are fugitives from the coalition dominating the universe, who will stop at nothing to reclaim the girl. The crew that was once used to skimming the outskirts of the galaxy unnoticed find themselves caught between the unstoppable military force of the Universal Alliance and the horrific, cannibalistic fury of the Reavers, savages who roam the very edge of space. Hunted by vastly different enemies, they begin to discover that the greatest danger to them may be on board Serenity herself.

Serenity is written and directed by Joss Whedon; produced by Barry Mendel; and executive-produced by Chris Buchanan, Alisa Tager and David Lester. (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/serenity/about.php)

rs98762001 · #2 Post by **rs98762001** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 10:23 pm

Which masterpiece to check out this weekend: SERENITY, or INTO THE BLUE?
Damn, the agony of choice.

Polybius · #3 Post by **Polybius** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 11:18 pm

Whedon is one of those GenX sacred cows (like Conan O'Brien) whose appeal is largely lost on me.

I find his writing shallow, annoyingly glib and smarmy. Kind of a cut rate version of Kevin Smith and Guy Ritchie and their seeming aplomb with pop culture. (I'm getting pretty sick of those two, while I'm at it.)

Andre Jurieu · #4 Post by **Andre Jurieu** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 11:19 pm

rs98762001 wrote:Which masterpiece to check out this weekend: SERENITY, or INTO THE BLUE?
Damn, the agony of choice.

I'm not seeing either, but if I had to decide it's not even a contest.

the dancing kid · #5 Post by **the dancing kid** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 11:33 pm

I never got the chance to see the show during it's brief run on television, so I really have no clue what it's all about. However, I hear the guys who made it are pretty adamant about not having sound in space, which is worth a few point in my book. It does look like it's a huge mess of cliches, but everyone tells me the TV show was great at subverting those cliches, so who knows.

The Invunche · #6 Post by **The Invunche** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:33 am

Why shouldn't there be sound in space? If a microphone is placed right next to the expanding gasses of lets say an explosion surely it would record something.

Jem · #7 Post by **Jem** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:49 am

Having never watched one Buffy, Angel or Firefly episode I haven't been waiting in breathless anticipation for this film. At a glance it looks like a fun Saturday afternoon matinee similar to Flash Gordon or Star Wars (which it has been compared to).

Whether Serenity is a good film or not, it's likely to do well at the US box office either-way, due partly to Whedon's huge fan base.

Why shouldn't there be sound in space? If a microphone is placed right next to the expanding gasses of lets say an explosion surely it would record something.

Googled:Sound travels in waves like light or heat does, but unlike them, sound travels by making molecules vibrate. So, in order for sound to travel, there has to be something with molecules for it to travel through. On Earth, sound travels to your ears by vibrating air molecules. In deep space, the large empty areas between stars and planets, there are no molecules to vibrate. There is no sound there. Discovery 1 was silent in 2001 A Space Odyssey no?

The Fanciful Norwegian · #8 Post by **The Fanciful Norwegian** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:59 am

Invunche is basically right. You could pick up the sound of an exploding spaceship, but you would have to place the microphone within the explosion radius, which isn't terribly practical. If the mic were placed outside the explosion it wouldn't pick up anything, since the explosion wouldn't create a field of gas (through which sound waves would travel) but would instead dissipate quickly into space. When we see a ship exploding in a movie or TV show it's usually from a outside "omniscient" perspective, from which there should be no audible explosion. Explosions in space would also look very different than an earthbound explosion, but that's generally not the case in fictional depictions. At least now they show debris instead of just having the entire ship go up in a ball of flame like they did on old Star Trek episodes.

The Invunche · #9 Post by **The Invunche** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:54 am

Ahh but see these microphones are virtual and the filmmaker can place them wherever he or she likes.

The microphone placement thing isn't really my idea. It's Straczynski's explanation and if I remember correctly he claims it's backed up by NASA guys.

Yes, I have listened to the Babylon 5 commentary tracks. I don't go to conventions tho.

Fletch F. Fletch · #10 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:29 am

Jem wrote:Having never watched one Buffy, Angel or Firefly episode I haven't been waiting in breathless anticipation for this film. At a glance it looks like a fun Saturday afternoon matinee similar to Flash Gordon or Star Wars (which it has been compared to).

Whether Serenity is a good film or not, it's likely to do well at the US box office either-way, due partly to Whedon's huge fan base.

Whedon has said that you can go into Serenity not having watched the show at all.

Personally, I'm curious to see it. Whedon himself described the show as what if Han Solo decided not go with Luke and Obi Wan to rescue Leia.

I dunno, I agree with the above. You sort of have to take the film as enjoyable popcorn movie with a modicum of smarts. Plus, I heard this film beats Lucas at his game and with a quarter of the budget of the last Star Wars film. Not to mention Clint Eastwood's long-time DP, Jack Green also shot this movie.

A conversation between Joss Whedon and Neil Gaiman courtesy of Time magazine

the dancing kid · #11 Post by **the dancing kid** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 11:29 am

Yeah, sound in space is technically possible, but the way it's done always strikes me as cheating on some level. I had a physics course awhile ago that did a unit on "movie physics" and that was one of the things that always came up.

Harold Gervais · #12 Post by **Harold Gervais** » Fri Sep 30, 2005 12:39 am

I've been waiting for this movie since Firefly got the plug pulled far too early by Fox and now, due to all the Katrina mess, I don't have a movie theater locally to see it. Suppose I could drive to Baton Rouge but an hour & fifteen minutes each way to see a movie sucks. And no art house now to see A History of Violence. Ugh. I know these troubles pale in comparison to those of so many others but hey, we want what we want. Enjoy all you future Browncoats.

Polybius · #13 Post by **Polybius** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 12:22 am

It's tanking and the fanboys don't know whether to shit or go blind.

Fletch F. Fletch · #14 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 9:24 am

Polybius wrote:It's tanking and the fanboys don't know whether to shit or go blind.

Not quite. The film is second at the box office. Not bad considering its based on a cult TV show with a small fanbase and doesn't feature an A-listers to draw in a huge mainstream audience. It's also gotten a 79% rating on Rotten Tomatoes as well so it's hardly being universally despised by the critics.

Jem · #15 Post by **Jem** » Mon Oct 03, 2005 9:36 pm

From Box Office Guru:
Generating the best opening among all the new films was the science fiction adventure Serenity with $10.1M. Launching moderately in 2,188 locations, the PG-13 film averaged a respectable $4,610 for Universal. However, the crowd was not big enough to push the film to impressive heights. The $39M production appealed to an adult male audience with 52% of the crowd being age 30 and older and a very high 61% being men. Exit polls were encouraging as 88% of those polled marked the space flick "excellent" or "very good." As expected for a sci-fi flick, Serenity was the only picture in the top ten to see Saturday sales fall from Friday.

Polybius · #16 Post by **Polybius** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 1:27 am

We're a little defensive, aren't we?

First off, I didn't say anything about it's quality. Reviews have been generally at least decent.

It made a shade over $10 million this weekend, but there were pretty much across the board predictions of $15-16 Mil and hopes for more, possibly the start of something that could be a franchise for Universal. I seriously doubt that's in the cards, now.

Second place by default to a week old film in a low week is not anything to stop the presses over. The budget was $40 Mil and I've seen the advertising outlay listed at $10 Mil but considering the frequency and placement of the ads I wouldn't be surprised if that was low. They'll make some of that back on DVDs but this whole thing is starting to look like a bit of a boondoggle. I'm not privy to the inner workings of Whedondom, but I also find myself wondering if this wasn't essentially something of a bullet someone bit in order to secure his services for another more profitable project.

And lastly, and maybe most importantly, I was mainly referring to the reaction of a lot of people I've read online who deluded themselves into thinking this was going to be some sort of phenomenon, a cinematic grassroots uprising that would take everyone by surprise and make a big profit. Those expectations have been dashed and those people are running around in circles.

I know it will come as no surprise to long timers here, but I frequent some pretty declasse places on the net...

Fletch F. Fletch · #17 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:12 am

Polybius wrote:We're a little defensive, aren't we?

First off, I didn't say anything about it's quality. Reviews have been generally at least decent.

It made a shade over $10 million this weekend, but there were pretty much across the board predictions of $15-16 Mil and hopes for more, possibly the start of something that could be a franchise for Universal. I seriously doubt that's in the cards, now.

That's probably true. I think that Universal was probably expecting only modest results on this one. It should make its money back.

Second place by default to a week old film in a low week is not anything to stop the presses over. The budget was $40 Mil and I've seen the advertising outlay listed at $10 Mil but considering the frequency and placement of the ads I wouldn't be surprised if that was low. They'll make some of that back on DVDs but this whole thing is starting to look like a bit of a boondoggle. I'm not privy to the inner workings of Whedondom, but I also find myself wondering if this wasn't essentially something of a bullet someone bit in order to secure his services for another more profitable project.

That may be true. I think it will probably do well overseas as well. I dunno, I always looked at this movie as becoming a cult item so I was surprised when Universal began pushing it so hard.

And lastly, and maybe most importantly, I was mainly referring to the reaction of a lot of people I've read online who deluded themselves into thinking this was going to be some sort of phenomenon, a cinematic grassroots uprising that would take everyone by surprise and make a big profit. Those expectations have been dashed and those people are running around in circles.

Yeah, I don't travel in those circles but from what I've heard they can be quite rabid. It's a shame that the film didn't do better box office-wise as it is actually very well made. Whedon basically beats Lucas at his own game... not that hard nowadays but he certainly shows up the last 3 Star Wars films and with the quarter of the budget that Lucas worked with. I was never a fan of the show Firefly but after seeing Serenity it has made me want to check it out.

porquenegar · #18 Post by **porquenegar** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 12:50 pm

I saw it this weekend and it is pretty much what you would expect, video game violence, pretty bare plot, cartoonish characters. That being said, there were some funny moments and it was enjoyable for what it was.

lord_clyde · #19 Post by **lord_clyde** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 5:06 am

I just saw it, and, I am really hesitant to admit I loved it. Maybe it's because I was just in the mood, or my expectations were low, but every moment of the movie had me in a sort of fanboy trance - except that I'm not a Joss Whedon fanboy (or am I?) having loathed every bit of Buffy and Angel I've ever seen.
It's a strange of hybrid of Space Opera, western, and zombie horror.
I saw A History of Violence yesterday and really liked it, but Serenity grabbed me. Oh god I can't believe I prefer Whedon to Cronenberg. . . WHAT'S HAPPENING TO ME!?

Fletch F. Fletch · #20 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Tue May 15, 2007 8:59 am

Heh. Yeah, you can tell Whedon is influenced by '70s horror and SF... although, there was one scene in Serenity that made me think of The Quiet Earth.

Artwork

I really enjoyed this movie and the additional extras sounds like it might actually be worth the double dip...

Title: Serenity (IMDb)
Starring: Nathan Fillion
Released: 21st August 2007
SRP: $26.98

Further Details:
Universal has announced a new two-disc collector's edition of Serenity which stars Nathan Fillion. This Joss Whedon directed sci-fi will be available to own from the 21st August, and should retail at around $26.98. The film itself will be presented in 2.35:1 anamorphic widescreen, along with English Dolby Digital 5.1, and DTS 5.1 Surround tracks. Extras will include a audio commentary with Whedon, a second commentary with Whedon, Nathan Fillion, Adam Baldwin, Summer Glau and Ron Glass, a Joss Whedon intro, deleted scenes with director commentary, extended scenes, outtakes, and a Take A Walk On Serenity featurette. Completing the package will be a Green Clan featurette, a We'll Have A Fruity Oaty Good Time! feature, A Filmmaker's Journey featurette, a Future History: The Story Of Earth That Was featurette, a Re-lighting The Firefly featurette, a What's In A Firefly? featurette, a Session 416 feature, and a Sci-Fi Inside: Serenity feature.

patrick · #21 Post by **patrick** » Tue May 15, 2007 11:16 am

I'll be picking this up, I think this might be the best "straight" sci-fi film of the last few years.

lord_clyde · #22 Post by **lord_clyde** » Tue May 15, 2007 11:21 am

Sounds like a must buy, especially since my old disc was stolen along with everything else. Whedon commentary is always fun.

Fletch F. Fletch · #23 Post by **Fletch F. Fletch** » Tue May 15, 2007 1:17 pm

lord_clyde wrote:Sounds like a must buy, especially since my old disc was stolen along with everything else. Whedon commentary is always fun.

Yeah, I can only imagine the kind of comments that will result with Joss interacting with cast members, esp. Baldwin and Fillion.

Jean-Luc Garbo · #24 Post by **Jean-Luc Garbo** » Thu May 17, 2007 2:41 pm

Thumbs down to the artwork, but three thumbs up to the extras! I think it's about time I got my copy of this movie now. I'm also looking forward to the commentary with the cast. Whedon and Fillion had a good vibe going on their Firefly commentary so it should be just as good here.