Firefly

I felt I had to comment on this show because of another persons negative opinion on it(target audience of 8 or 9 years). I find this show addicting and the characters far more interesting than many sci-fi shows that have gained far more publicity because of their special effects. Each character is very well developed and entices the audience to want to find out more about them. As a personal response as to why weapons haven't developed beyond the space western....several of the episodes show scenes of past and current technology far more advanced than the weapons used in the show on a regular basis.laser guns,magnetic grapplers,floating cities,multiple brain surgeries involving nerve manipulation,killer sonic tech,and much more. The show is set on the frontier of known space with characters that are not rich. A regular western gun is all that can be safely used on a spaceship. Another gun, whether laser or high caliber projectile weapon will pierce the hull and cause major problems for the crew..if not kill them outright.

The social intricacies of the companions and the "Houses" they come from, the military training of the "shepherd" preacher, the developing psionic powers of "the crazy sister-river" and all the others leads me to believe that Whedon put a lot of planning and thought into each character and the personal world they live in. They all seem to have a substantial, believable past. They all seem to have personal goals that are not necessarily tied to the show...as if they could leave at any time if their lives and beliefs take them that way. This comes across as very believable.

While others are entitled to their own opinion, all of this, in my opinion, makes me think this show is worth every penny spent to produce it. I also own it.

Series creator Joss Whedon took a somewhat familiar concept (science fiction as the new "wild west frontier") and freshened it up with a lively, chemistry-rich cast of characters, a richly detailed, plausible and interesting social setting, a dash of excitement, classic science fiction "find the better part of humanity" ideals, a goal to avoid or make light of most of the tired and worn-out genre cliches and a fantastic production team. The resulting product? An excellent piece of original artful entertainment that was a breath of fresh air in the stagnating science fiction scene on television (or anywhere else).

Today, where is Firefly? Canceled after airing about 11 episodes, out of order, of the mere 13 episodes contracted. Why? Fox executives considered the ratings to be "abysmal." Were they? This may be subjective. At the time, Fox was (and still is) pushing almost costless, content-free exploitative "reality television" (such as Joe Millionaire) and formula-reuse "genre simulation" eye candy (such as "John Doe"). In comparison, Firefly, with film quality special effects, a full cast, directors, writers, editors and so forth likely looked to be a much smaller payout. After all, television in the USA is not about art or entertainment; it is about making as much money from sponsors as possible.

Fox didn't think that the Firefly pilot was "exciting" enough. Joss Whedon made some changes to address their concerns. Then Fox didn't even bother to SHOW the pilot until the very last airdate of Firefly, prior to cancellation ("tonight's special: two hour celebration of the cancellation of Firefly!"). Promotion of Firefly was half-hearted at best. On a channel that tells its viewers "Hey, who needs drama?" is there any chance that the marketing people even know HOW to promote something other than sitcoms and exploitative reality shows? Fox is basically telling its own audience that it doesn't like its own programming, so why should people watch it??

As we face the homogenization of television content, Firefly was a brilliant spark of newness and excitement for those of us (the few) in the television audience that desire thought-provoking story-telling and entertainment that actually requires a viewer's mind to be active instead of blank. To some of us, the outcome was never really in question; how could something this good survive on networks (and with advertisers) that believe the lowest-common-denominator is their ideal target?

Knowing the likely outcome, the failure of Firefly hurts all the more because of just how good it actually was in such a short amount of time.

It wasn't about the space ships; it was about the life lived in and around them. It wasn't about the aliens (there weren't any); it was about the people. It wasn't about the struggle between the evil bad-guys and the super heros; it was about the daily struggle to BE a "good-guy" in a world filled with people who often didn't try very hard and the fact that sometimes the heros are just regular people afterall. It wasn't about the sex; it was about the attitudes people have about sex. It wasn't about the profits; it was about selling a good product and deserving the profits.

It is quite telling to see what kind of programming thrives in this economy and what kind of programming gets a sharp stick in the eye. If we are to believe the executives of Fox and other networks, the viewers of television in the USA are unintelligent, selfish and naive automatons that are only capable of being entertained by programs that exploit the failures, ignorance and stupidity of others.

What if they're right?

Luckily, we have the "hard-core" groups of fans to remind us that there are indeed a few active brains seeking stimulation out there. Not to say that all science fiction fans are the best of humanity, it is easy to see that they spend a little more time considering narrative and consequences of actions.

The fans of Firefly funded, organized and accomplished an advertisement in Variety magazine to support Firefly. Yes, that's right. The fans bought advertising for their favorite show.

Though it warmed the hearts of the Firefly production team, Fox wasn't impressed. Such groups of fandom are considered fringe and insignificant when compared to the mighty marketing numbers. Still, you have to admit, there must be something good about a show when the fans purchase advertising in major publications to support it.

The fans still hope that Joss Whedon gets another open-minded network to see that Firefly has great potential as a successful, revenue-generating series. Whedon's previous exploits, the highly successful "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" series and its spin-offs, started with a similar "abysmal outlook" but another network had the foresight to give it a healthy chance when Fox was too eager to give up after not seeing instant success and profit after a handful of out-of-order showings. They didn't even bother to show all 13 episodes completed. Maybe someone at Fox's accounting departments ought to make note that it's a waste of resources to pay for episodes and then do nothing with them.

The chance of recovery isn't good. People move on in search of more employment when the project they were on has been killed. The landscape of television business today has a tendency to portray intelligent programming as "unsuccessful" and "profit-less." Joss Whedon's past successes seem not to matter much to networks hell-bent on making huge profits on zero-product (much like the dot com explosion that ended spectacularly badly years back).

Networks say they are giving the audiences what they want. It may be more accurate to suggest that networks are limiting the audience's ability to choose anything other than what they're given. It's not likely that everyone will simply turn off the TV and go read a book in protest, is it?

Back to Firefly: If you like smart science fiction (or just smart fiction in general), well drawn characters and worlds, Firefly would have been a great show to escape into every Friday night as you relax from the daily rituals of work and responsibility. Too bad it never got much of a chance to entertain us.

With the failure of Firefly at the hands of businessmen and executives who do not even like to watch their own programming, it is clear that the "future Joss Whedons" of television will have a harder time selling their projects to the networks. The result? There's plenty more where "Joe Millionaire" came from; there are countless other profit-seeking formulas that are taking the place of intelligent programming everywhere, calling themselves "Entertainment."

Frightening.

As with BtVS, the world is divided into people who get Firefly and people who don't. In this series Joss Whedon created one of the most realistic post-war visions of the future ever committed to tape, that at the same time spoke about yesterday and today. Maybe a little too much today for its own good.

The series is anti-corporate, anti-government and, while it takes the stand that some things are worth fighting for, it is largely anti-war. No wonder FOX did everything in its power to kill it off, including airing episodes out of order, skipping weeks after airing only three eps and, inevitably canceling the show without even airing episodes 12, 13 and 14 (out of 15). This was particularly damaging, as Firefly had a greater sense of ongoing plot than any other Whedon series in its first year. Viewers were left wondering, on more than one occasion, when a character would reference something we hadn't seen yet.

The backstage dramatics aside, Firefly is intelligent and, like Buffy, mythic - except this time Whedon is dealing with the myth of America: the Frontier, the Civil War, the rise of the Corporation, etc . . .

Firefly is a demanding show. It asks its audience to appreciate the shades of grey in its characters' moral scale. The villains are not comfortingly dressed as an alien race. In 500 years mankind will still be its own worst enemy. Technology will be in the hands of a privileged few, and others will in "The Black" - Whedon's frontier third world - where it is possible to exist without the interference (or benefit) of civilization and government. Things will be dirty, and used. Firefly creates a universe that almost totally opposes that of (that bastion of television sci-fi) Star Trek: its Federation-like central power (the Alliance) is interpreted as being oppressive and dystopic. We are on the side of those who resisted (like the Maqui) and lost.

The acting is strong, the writing as excellent, funny and moving as on any Whedon show, and the effects and sets create a consistent, believable world. It is a shame the series didn't have a more hospitable environment in which to grow and become all it could have been.

FOX must have the greatest talent scouts in the world, but the worst executives. "Firefly" is the best example. It was simultaneously the best new show, the best western series in decades, and the best sci-fi show on TV (and coming from a die-hard Trekkie, placing them above "Enterprise" is saying something). They didn't have a single bad episode, and some were spectacular. The premise, the characters, the plots and the dialogue were all top-notch. And FOX cancelled it without even really giving it a chance.

Maybe the show couldn't stand in the end. Maybe I'm alone in this, and there aren't enough fans to justify what the show cost. But making that call after half a season, with half of the episodes pre-empted for baseball playoffs was a phenomenally stupid thing to do. That show should have been here to stay, and it got axed without a chance to prove itself. I only pray the movie works out. At least we'll have something.

I have to admit, I had serious doubts about this show. I hate westerns, and a sci-fi/western combination sounded like a really bad show concept--especially since the most recognizable actor in the show was a guy who had a minor part in Two Guys, A Girl, and A Pizza Place (itself a pretty forgettable show). But I found myself getting drawn into this series very quickly. It is very witty, as well as suspenseful. The characters are a lot of fun, too. It is definitely a little quirkier than most of the shows out there, but is that really a bad thing? I loved the banter, loved the acting, and was very disappointed to watch the last episode last night. This show deserved better than to be canceled in the middle of its first run. I'm guessing that the humor was too high-brow for most of the TV watchers of the world.