This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"We don't knock during dark rituals?"
11944 members | you are not logged in | 30 July 2014












February 18 2011

The Evil Fox Executive strikes again! Firefly will be running on The Science Channel? Wonder how FOX feels about that? [WARNING! Extreme webcomic violence!]

For those not familiar with HijiNKS ENSUE, The Evil Fox Executive is a recurring kitten-eating villain who nightly sups on the despair of tv-loving geeks. His goatee is fueled by MADNESS. His HEART is a HATE-FILLED PINEAPPLE.

That was great, I got a chuckle out of it.
That "thud slide" was a very cute/clever use of-- I'm not really sure that counts as a sound-effect or onomatopoeia. But yeah, I like that as a stylistic choice.

(The Jeopardy one right before it I actually liked more since it seems more "grounded" to me somehow, though yes I know that's a little absurd.)
Am I the only one who thinks the "FOX cancelled Firefly" jokes grew old some time ago? It's been nine years. I know it hurt, but let go of the hate already.
@ The One True b!X,

I understand your point, and some aspect of me agrees with it, but I'd argue that Fox's cancelations are a very complex subject that's hardly limited to Firefly.

For a loooong time, Fox programmed a lot of wonderful shows that spoke to different people in one way or another. Some people take their entertainment very seriously and I'd argue that the extent to which that happens differs in every person. To some people, it's "just TV" but to others, it might be one of the most enchanting stories that they've ever seen. Sometimes the characters or the stories speak to the fans very deeply. And there can be other factors that lead to strong reactions too.

For instance, I have a strong sense of wanting "fairness" in the world. And so it's especially frustrating to me to see how "unfair" the handling of Firefly was imo. And the reactions can build on each other. I'm not mad at Fox just about Firefly, my madness started in 1993 when they canceled the very promising and superior show "Class of '96" because it was set in a college and the original "90210" people were going to graduate the next year and be in college too. And Fox didn't want two college shows on their schedule at the same time. And then in 1994 I was hugely bummed when the excellent "Adventures of Brisco County Jr" was canceled. Especially so, as "The X-Files" was given a chance to grow (and I didn't care for that show nearly as much). Why did one get a chance where the other didn't? As the years went on, then a large number of unique and interesting and entertaining shows were canceled by Fox. Some fans love only one of them, some several, and others a dozen or more, but if you feel that you've been burned, five or ten or fifteen times by Fox, then at a certain point reasonableness isn't as much of a factor as it might be in someone who has only ever enjoyed one or two of their shows. "Dark Angel" was doing fine on Tuesdays before Fox moved it to Fridays. Did they really think that "Drive" would get much attention launched so late in the year? "Reunion" was a serialized murder mystery in which most of the major plot points were never revealed. Was pressure from the Chandler family really the reason that "Pasadena" was cut short so soon? Couldn't Fox have done a better job promoting "Wonderfalls"? "Family Guy" proved that it wasn't the show itself, it was something else. And so on and so forth.

Imo, everyone has different reactions and as long as they aren't harming anyone then they're fully entitled to those feelings.
People are entitled to their feelings. It doesn't make the joke any less flat though.
Agreed. What I find sad is that people still need to vent at this point. The end of Farscape really annoys me, but at some point I think if you keep writing jokes about it 5 to 6 years after the fact you start turning the people who did it into sympathetic figures.

In this particular case, whenever I see a Fox canceled list, I for one am always astounded at the number of shows that Fox gave a chance rather than what they eventually did with them. Say what you want, but until V (which is hard to give too much credit for since it's a remake) Space based science fiction really hasn't been seen SINCE Firefly on a major network.

The Tick, Briscoe County, Firefly, Dollhouse... what other network even bothers with properties like this? NBC is starting to, but that's a network trying to reinvent.
Fox greenlights more culty/edgy/scifi shows therefore they will cancel more. It isn't systemic evil. It's math. I miss Firefly too but, I know way too much about the business to blame the people running Fox now.
I'd agree with you, Sunfire, that I didn't find this specific cartoon funny. I was defending the sentiment behind it, not this particular expression of that line of thinking.

[ edited by Risch22 on 2011-02-18 21:44 ]
Am I the only one who thinks the "FOX cancelled Firefly" jokes grew old some time ago? It's been nine years. I know it hurt, but let go of the hate already.

When Fox canceling compelling tv shows for bizarre/indescribable reasons gets old so will the jokes.
When Fox canceling compelling tv shows for bizarre/indescribable reasons so will the jokes.


Nobody watched it at the time.
But I thought Evil Fox Executives (tm) were fashionable, hip vegetarians. Oh wait... that's the help.
It's easier to blame the execs than the viewers. Fox isn't a charity.
Nobody watched it at the time.

Wasn't just referring to Firefly. It's the general principle of Fox picking up unusual/risky projects and then promptly chickening out on them that keeps the jokes alive.
"Nobody watched it at the time."

I have never agreed with this line of thinking.

Millions of people supposedly watched Firefly.

The current Nielsen system estimated the audience as too few millions to satisfy Fox.

But I don't see how those projected millions of people equals "nobody"?
"It's easier to blame the execs than the viewers. Fox isn't a charity."

Some shows need patience and time to grow. Or they're in the wrong circumstances. "X-Files" was no major hit ratings wise in it's first Season. Neither was "Cheers". "Grey's Anatomy" did adequately in the ratings, but it wasn't until it's post-Super Bowl airing that it became the big hit that it became. In the right circumstances, some canceled shows can even find viewers. "Baywatch" was an unqualified failure and was canceled by NBC. Does that mean that there was NO audience out there for Baywatch? Recently, "The Game" which was canceled after poor ratings on the CW was brought back by BET to tremendous ratings. Was the problem there really entirely with the show?

And the Fox executives sometimes do deserve a portion of the blame. They control the advertising, the time slot, they sometimes ask for changes, additional Episodes to be written in a weekend, air Episodes out of order, etc. Is the fault entirely on the execs? Of course not, but I don't agree that you can automatically rule them out as incapable of bearing any of the blame. Additionally, there can be behind the scenes issues, problems, relationships that outsiders are never privy to.
Risch22, every year a TV network gets pitched maybe 800 TV shows. maybe 50 of those make it an ordered script. Maybe 15 of those make it to an ordered pilot. Maybe 3 of those make it to a 13 episode first season pickup. Only 1 will make it to a 2nd season.

It's a brutal business where one or two big hits pay for the rest of the shows that networks can only hope will breakeven, maybe make a small profit or maybe not lose too much.

Do I think that Firefly was treated poorly? Absolutely. Do I think it was treated worse than every other show? Absolutely not.

[ edited by IrrationaliTV on 2011-02-19 02:18 ]
well, I thought it was funny... it seemed to me like it was making fun of the idea that people at Fox are "evil" by taking it to the extremes... clearly someone who cancelled firefly must also eat people.
@ IrrationaliTV,

I agree with much of what you say, but don't believe that your post really addresses my points at all. I'm glad for you that you reach the conclusion that you do, I feel differently.

[ edited by Risch22 on 2011-02-20 22:03 ]
And the Fox executives sometimes do deserve a portion of the blame. They control the advertising, the time slot, they sometimes ask for changes,

Is anyone else noticing the publicity push this is getting on the Science Channel?

The push on Science Channel vs. the "launch" on Fox reminds me of something a writer said in a workshop. Paraphrasing: "A network needs to be able to launch a show. It's their job to bring the audience to that first show. It's my job to keep that audience and build it." First run Firefly was "launched" mostly down, that is, for the few (and I mean "few") people who noticed the "launch" the first time around.

It actually felt similar with Dollhouse. The network had no idea what they were trying to do the whole time. I mean, as much as I enjoyed Summer & Eliza vamping it up on those later "Hot Fridays" promotions, they did nothing to hook me on the show. By comparison look at the teasers Science Channel is running for this upcoming showing of Firefly, full of 'verse-y goodness and our Big Damn Heroes dripping charisma all over the screen. Seriously, that cast! Point a camera in their general direction for any 5 minutes you like, then bang that up as a teaser. (Also, show the whole series, and in order, even.)

Fox-the-Network doesn't seem to be able to launch these concept-y series, full of, you know, ideas, and plot, and walking contradictions called characters. Maybe they should stop trying. Maybe we should stop expecting this kind of show to work there.


Meanwhile, we can enjoy what we did get. I was singing about deltoids of compassion just last Tuesday. The only thing that would have made it better was wearing my Jayne hat while I sang.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home