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
"I played a very bad hand very well. There's a distinction"
11945 members | you are not logged in | 24 October 2014




Tweet







December 19 2012

We don't need another Star Wars movie! According to this Salon article, Disney could learn a lesson or three from the great "Firefly"

FTA: "The main reason I dread the idea of a new Star Wars saga is because we’ve seen it already. It was a TV show called Firefly. It was cancelled 10 years ago this month, and it was better than anything George Lucas ever did."

After spending as much money as Disney did, they aren't going to NOT do something with the franchise.
See the article keeps saying Firefly, but that's clearly a typo.
Now that the franchise is out of George's hands--Disney has his (finally admitted to existing) treatments for 7, 8 and 9, but they don't have to use them--I'll wait to see what talent is assembled before passing judgement. They brought Lawrence Kasdan back in for some writing duties, and considering that's the guy who co-wrote Empire, Jedi and Raiders, that might not be such a bad thing. He's practically been invisible for a decade and his last one was the brilliantly horrible "Dreamcatcher," so who knows what he's actually got left in the tank. Heavy rumors swirling around Matthew Vaughn as the director don't impress me.
What's the source on Disney wanting to reboot the franchise? This is the first I've heard of that. As far as I know, there are only plans to continue and/or spin off from where it left off. And I see nothing wrong with that. Lightsabers, Jedi, Sith, smugglers, droids, Wookies, Twi'lek... The Star Wars universe is a very rich framework in which to tell all kinds of stories. Just because the prequels sucked doesn't mean there isn't something good left to be done with that canvas. Especially with Lucas being out of the picture, who, while surrounded by sycophants as he was during the creation of the prequels, seems unable to tell the difference between good ideas and bad ideas.
Firefly is good but it's not as good as Star Wars.
Firefly never had time to be as good as Star Wars. If it had 7 tv seasons and 2 movies, there may have been something there. While Firefly is amazing in itself, it's just not big enough to compete with Star Wars.
I'm with GreatMuppetyOdin (I don't know what Twi'lek are/is, but with Lightsabers, Jedi, Sith, Wookies etc. the Star Wars universe comes with some pretty great ingredients to create a new movie from).

I hadn't heard those Matthew Vaughn rumors, but I think he would be great. I loved his Stardust (one of the rare film adaptations I liked better than the novel) and I enjoyed Kick-Ass too. If he could bring the sense of fun and originality of these two films to the Star Wars universe I think he'd be a perfect pick.

I don't think Joss is too big for Star Wars, and certainly wouldn't hate to see his take on it, although I'd probably prefer a completely new Jossian creation (I'm not sure a Star Wars flick would be the most interesting Matthew Vaughn film either).

[ edited by the Groosalugg on 2012-12-19 22:23 ]
While Firefly is awesome and may share some common threads (so to speak) Star Wars not, is it.
Star Wars used to be good. The last three films wrecked them all for me.
What readeem147 said...(though, to be fair, I'm not really that big on Jedi either).
Just no... All of it. And if you're going to argue Star Wars vs. Firefly, keep it to IV, V, and VI, because no one even bothers making the case I, II, and III were better than Galaxy Quest.

I'd kind of like to see Lawrence Kasdan have another crack at it.
Ah, Galaxy Quest. One of my very favorites. I love that movie.
There's no comparison. Firefly has a more interesting universe than Star Wars, and it is filled with people who have real emotions and real relationships. The people in Star Wars may as well have the same genitalia as their action figures.

Th Force could have been cool, but it is only wielded by dull people. Firefly's brains-stripped-of-amygdalae turned out to be more interesting (or at least resulted in a more interesting character) than the Force.
Lawrence Kasdan isn't going to be writing episode VII though he'll possibly be one of several story consultants in some capacity.

The producer/writer combo of Kathleen Kennedy and Michael Arndt is more than capable of making a fantastic adventure film, though, so as more talent is announced, hopefully everyone can stop being so down on the idea.

The Star Wars franchise being retreated and continued could be a really good thing, and Disney so far has been picking good people—ones who based on their histories can see the distinction between the more classic form of action/adventure storytelling that Star Wars was bred from and the modern James Cameron->Christopher Nolan school of action blockbuster filmmaking.

I think the hardest part is capturing the Star Wars feel, which already was absent in most of the prequel trilogy. But they have a good EP and a great Writer; they just need a director willing to really examine what made things like Star Wars and Indiana Jones feel like such grand adventures and why almost nothing these days feels similar.
People keep saying its a reboot. Its not.
It is Episode 7 - 9.
Thats a good thing.
Lucas involvement is "minimal".
Thats a good thing.
J.J. Abrahms said he will not direct it.
Thats a VERY good thing.

It wont be FIREFLY but it is so far shaping up to be interesting.
Firefly is good but it's not as good as Star Wars.

Simon | December 19, 22:06 CET

-----------------------------------------

Sorry dude, beg to differ.
No Star Wars, no Firefly. I mean, there's an homage to ESB in the shootout scene on Whitefall...

The trouble is, we're arguing myths versus people. Star Wars is cinematic myth. Luke's a bland and blank slate so that we can all be Luke. Obi-wan is every mentor. (Yoda, however, is just Yoda.)

We can't all be Mal, though. Most of us wouldn't want to be him. Most of us would much rather watch him, though; he's a real person with a real story.

We want to be Luke (or Han, or Leia), and we want to watch Mal; that's the difference in a nutshell. Myth versus people. Try to compare the two without keeping that in mind, and you'll just get a headache.
True enough. That's the thing it's hard to explain to some people these days. Back in the day, that's what SciFi often gave us. Myths, and that was it as far as pop culture mostly noticed. I love that Joss made a story about *people* in space that captured a segment of pop cultures imagination. But he wasn't the first. And it didn't invalidate everything that came before it.

I love Firefly. But it deservers to be in a discussion with Star Wars and Star Trek. It did not displace them. They are still historically exactly what they were before Firefly.
Firefly is better than Star Wars. I think I can say that because though I loved Star Wars as a kid, it didn't continue to resonate for me as an adult, so I don't have that cultural nostalgia/hero worship of the franchise and of Lucas that many have. So for me, this article was a huge win.
While Firefly is amazing in itself, it's just not big enough to compete with Star Wars.

LOUiE | December 19, 22:17 CET


Firefly is a string quartet. Star Wars is a big symphony. Firefly is perfection.
In my perfect world there was only one Star Wars movie. Every sequel diminished what I liked about the first movie, changing what I saw as a story of normal people becoming heroes in extraordinary circumstances to a strange fantasy universe where battles within a genetically super powered aristocracy overshadow all the normal people. The SW universe bored me.

Firefly is a far more interesting universe, and better on my shelf beside Star Wars than any of the sequels.
Firefly has a more interesting universe than Star Wars

This. Just. What.

Throwing in a couple of Chinese curse words/phrases and some generic back story about war, does not an interesting universe make. Yeah, yeah, potential and all that. But, we have to go by the world shown on screen during the series, and that was not very interesting at all. (Which, yeah, makes the comparison unfortunate as Star Wars has had decades to become a much, much more interesting universe.)

Now, Farscape having a more interesting universe? That one is definitely arguable.
It's hard to read things like this, where I disagree with almost every single word. It's like sticking needles in my eyes whilst continually getting kicked in the balls. Why the author decided to make his argument in this fashion is beyond me. He infers that he's a fan of Joss, but he comes off as a poser that's just got through watching Firefly.

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