I thought the review was fair. A lot of the reviewer's concerns are ones that I happen to personally share, so I can understand where s/he is coming from. I think we all suffer from the same thing – a fan is trying to gauge how a non-fan will react. I gave up, deciding that I just can't distance myself enough to say for certain. But a lot of what they had to say makes sense. To me, at any rate.

Having read reviews, both positive and negative, I still think it'll be impossible to gauge how the film will go over with the mainstream. For every non-fan you find who loves it, there's another who doesn't. I maintain what I said a while back: whether it succeeds or fails, I think it's going to do it spectacularly.

Jet Wolf | June 27, 03:11 CET

Can I just say that I am really tired of hearing people who are familiar with the show talk about how people who aren't familiar with the show will feel?

It would be so refreshing to read a review that approaches the movie simply as a movie, and not an extention of something else.

mnspnr | June 27, 03:42 CET

IMDB??

eddy | June 27, 03:46 CET

I thought the review was mostly fair, but I'm completely lost about the meaning of this:

I would have preferred some spoilers and more details, because I don't have a clue what he means and I saw the film twice. IMO nothing pulled me out of the fun, and nothing caused me irritation, although a lot of it did supply both meaning and emotion to me.

embers | June 27, 03:47 CET

It would be so refreshing to read a review that approaches the movie simply as a movie, and not an extention of something else.

While I think I understand where you're coming from, and even agree to a certain extent, I don't know that it's possible at this point in time. Serenity has a different tone than Firefly, but its source remains nevertheless. This isn't Firefly, Rebooted (ala Batman Begins), nor is it a film with no previous context; it is an extention of the series.

I think we can probably all agree, as Joss himself says in the intro, that what's going to make or break this film are the non-Browncoats that come to see it. As a result, I believe that if an individual truly wants to succeed, it's natural to try and figure out how those non-Browncoats will react. The same can be said for any Hollywood adaptation or continuation of a pre-existing work, be it TV show, novel, game or comic book. We humans like our familiar ground and frames of reference.

Jet Wolf | June 27, 05:04 CET

I agree with embers that the review paragraph she highlights is a little short of explanation, and means little to me either. However, I also share some of the misgivings - if that's not too strong a word, - that the reviewer has about Serenity. I also have absolutely no sense of whether non-Firefly fans will be into the movie. In any case, I think my unwished for but unavoidable attempt to view Serenity through both my own eyes and through the eyes of a newbie probably caused me to enjoy it less than I should have. I suspect I was so anxious for it to be incredible that I possibly failed to appreciate just how good it was.

One rather sombre note: I saw Batman Begins last night, and the Serenity preview attracted no excitement, or even murmurs, at all. Now I'm hardly saying that one late-night Saturday audience in Long Beach means much, but, personally, it kinda depressed me a little. By contrast, the War of the Worlds preview (look, Tom Cruise! Spielberg! cute blonde girl in peril!) seemed to get the crowd going. Feh.

SoddingNancyTribe | June 27, 05:08 CET

My problem is that I have heard all the arguments but, still can not comprehend how a fan of Firefly could possibly not love Serenity.

I really don't think some people were watching the same TV show that I was. Their TV show was all light and full of family loving goodness while the one I watched was dangerous, heartbreaking and full of being be shot, stabbed, getting their feelings hurt and just trying to barely survive in horrible circumstances.

My Firefly was pretty much as dark as Serenity.

TamaraC | June 27, 05:11 CET

Those who are uninitiated who see Serenity, will at that point become initiated. If they have unanswered questions, it will encourage them to buy or rent the Firefly DVDs, which I'm sure will answer most of their questions. I'm assuming come September, there will be a renewed advertising campaign involving the DVDs as part of the publicity for the movie. I'm not sure if this is called cross-polination or what, but it's surely not something to be worried about.

If someone who's never seen Batman before in comic book form (and what rock have they been under the past century?) but sees the Batman Begins movie, they too would no doubt have unanswered questions and might look into the comic books to find them. They may also opt to look into Batman's appearances in other movies and entertainment media over the years. Again, it's a win/win for both those who own Batman's copyright and those interested in experiencing storytelling. The important thing is whether or not Serenity is entertaining enough to interest newcomers, and I'm very confident that it will be.

ZachsMind | June 27, 05:37 CET

I was lucky enough to see two screenings. The two experiences were very different.

The first time I saw Serenity, I was extremely nervous and spent much of the movie focusing on how "the masses" would see it. The result? My stress over how well the movie would do in September dampened my enjoyment considerably. Add to that my shock over seeing the Fireflyverse on the big screen and dealing with all the stuff that happens in Serenity - well, I was a mess. The second time I saw it, I was able to relax and just go with the flow. And miracle of miracles, I loved it. I just loved it unconditionally. It was a rollicking, kick-ass, happy-sad-scary-funny action movie. The secret worries that I had been nursing evaporated.

If Firefly fans don't like or love Serenity, fair enough. All perceptions are valid. But I believe that the majority of "the masses" who go to see Serenity will not be holding it up to the same exacting, emotionally invested standards as we the initiated. We have so much more invested in the movie and the characters of the Fireflyverse that worrying and critiquing in great, Whedon-devotee depth is understandable. Hell, we do heavy analysis better than almost anyone! Serenity isn't perfect, but it doesn't need to be for it to be successful. For most regular viewers, they just want a fun, thrill-laden, exciting movie. I believe that Serenity delivers on all these counts, and much more besides. Also, let's remember that not everyone will like Serenity nor do they need to. That's a given for any movie. Not everyone loves even the most well-loved, popular movies. What encourages me is how many glowing things I've heard anecdotally from newbie viewers at screenings. It is these reports that most interest me, not the agonized (if interesting and understandable) reviews written by Firefly fans. At this rate, it's possible that "the masses" may end up loving Serenity more than many Firefly devotees! :)

[ edited by phlebotinin on 2005-06-27 03:52 ]

phlebotinin | June 27, 05:45 CET

I agree. I don't think the movie was particularly darker than the show.

I think people who never saw Firefly will like Serenity. When I went to the prescreening, I brought some friends who had never even heard of Firefly, and they loved it. They had never heard of Joss Whedon, and weren't very big sci-fi fans either. They said they'd go see it again when it comes out in September.

I think people who never saw the show will get the movie...the problem is in getting them into the seats in the first place. We need a new trailer, a massive grassroots campaign, or both to get the word out. Since April, I've told 10 new people about Firefly, and have gotten 6 to actually sit down and watch the series. They all loved it, and have told me they called their parents, relatives, other friends, etc. and told them about it as well. We need to take out advertisements, make posters, etc. in order to get the word out. After all, it's not so important that people like the movie as long as they buy a ticket for it.

gtman8503 | June 27, 05:47 CET

What gtman8503 said about getting people into seats. And how.

phlebotinin | June 27, 06:08 CET

Thank you, gtman. I was beginning to feel like I was the only one who watched that version of Firefly.

TamaraC | June 27, 06:15 CET

Well, fair enough. Only I'm not sure which people you're referring to. This reviewer was making several different criticisms, namely: Serenity doesn't fully establish an emotional connection to some of the crewmembers; several characters are, inevitably, left aside; Mal's plan, as a practical matter, was flawed; the role of Mr. Universe; certain abilities of the Reavers. I didn't see the criticism about it being too dark. And that wouldn't be my criticism either.

You can vehemently disagree with some or all of the propositions advanced by this reviewer. I mostly agree with the first three that I've listed, and tend not to care too much about the last two. But to assert that "a fan of Firefly" couldn't possibly not love Serenity is just not the case.

It's a complicated question, for many of the reasons given by Phlebotinin. Personally, I was somewhat detached from the movie, and somewhat dissatisfied with some of the plot and character choices made. Most of all, for me the movie didn't transcend the sum of its parts. That's, admittedly, totally subjective, but . . . what can I say? I was waiting for the moment when I would be blown away by Serenity. That moment never came. For me. Nearly every other fan to express an opinion has come out the other way. In this instance, I'm very happy to be in the minority.

SoddingNancyTribe | June 27, 06:26 CET

After all, it's not so important that people like the movie as long as they buy a ticket for it.

Strangely,I agree.

kus | June 27, 06:33 CET

I mostly had a great time with "Serenity" but, like good ol' SNT, I spent a lot of time fretting during the movie and found plenty of small things to not like or puzzle over. It actually felt a bit like I was working on the movie...as if it really would be my fault if it sucked. In any event, the movie is really growing on me in retrospect and my only real problem is that I think it's actually too fast-paced, which I think I may have already posted about.

In any event, all this second guessing reminds me a lot of all the Democrats who voted for John Kerry in the primary because they thought he would go over best with the masses. The bottom line is...it's impossible to tell what will go over with anyone other than yourself.

I'm looking forward to being able to see the movie again, once at least the critical verdict will be out. A bunch of good reviews from legit critics would be vindication enough to help me relax about it....and considering how rare actual wit is in action films, I'd be very surprised indeed if most of the reviews weren't at least mildly positive. Of course, audience reaction is another matter, but that would be a good start.

bobster | June 27, 06:54 CET

I'm gonna rant for a moment about the one critique that I hear over and over again that sticks in my craw. It goes like this: "How can a race of insane cannibals get their crap together enough to maintain a fleet of spaceships?" It's not that it's a totally illigitimate question. In fact, it's quite a logical one. It's just that, occasionally, as with any fantastical TV show or movie, you must crank your "suspend disbelief" knob up to 11 and accept things as they are. This is an outer-space adventure centering on an honest-to-god space cruiser. If you're gonna have bad guys for the good guys to fight, they need to have their own space vehicles, or it's just not gonna work. So to answer the original question: The Reavers can fly spaceships BECAUSE IT MAKES THE MOVE MORE EXCITING. Good enough for me.

rbt | June 27, 07:39 CET

SNT, I get your points. And I didn't say that a fan of Firely couldn't not like the movie. I said, I couldn't comprehend it. Lots of things happen that I don't understand.

I loved it the first time I saw it with no CGI and I loved it the second and third times as well and in some parts for totally different reasons.

TamaraC | June 27, 07:42 CET

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but I don't think the first three points will have any bearing on the success of the movie. Not every episode of Firefly gave every character a chance to shine, and the few movies that do manage to really explore this many characters tend to be "everyone is sitting around talking" kinds of movies. (Think 'The Big Chill' and 'The Breakfast Club' - which are not bad movies, but I think would be bad Firefly-related movies)

This is really Mal's story. His plan is flawed because he is. He doesn't have time to think things through (and his plan being less than solid is consistant with what has already been established in the series) and his back is against the wall. Perhaps newbies will feel shortchanged, but I think it's more likely to be the fans who feel like something is missing.

mnspnr | June 27, 07:56 CET

The first viewing, I was so nervous that it took me awhile to relax to the movie's pace. I wasn't just critical, I was watching like a hawk because I was worried the movie wouldn't work for X number of reasons. I came out of it emotionally wobbly, with a migraine, with some nitpicks, and loving it. The second time, the nitpicks were mostly gone, I loved it a lot more because I could relax and just soak in its wonderfulness, and picked out a whole bunch of things that made me very happy, those special Joss-bits that no one else can do.

The only complaint that concerns me is the character-building complaint, and to deal with that fairly, with nine characters, it's impossible to make a 2-hour movie that gives them all a good build-up (and introduction for the newbies!) that doesn't feel like exposition-heavy plot. I love the characters -- they're a huge part of the reason I love the show -- but they ultimately serve the movie, not the other way round, and I was OK with that. Of course, I fully expect the sequel to deal with these issues.

dottikin | June 27, 08:13 CET

TamaraC: you're right. I misstated what you said and I apologize (probably out of a defensive feeling that I was about to be classified into one of those Serenity-hating groups and, therefore, not a *true* fan . . . ) And mnspnr, you may well be right that those particular criticisms may not affect the eventual success of Serenity, and that Mal's plan was largely consistent with his other less-than-perfect plans.

Still, for me, the point is a broader one. I found it hard to buy into Mal's plan, not just for logistical reasons, but also because I felt the movie did not adequately establish that he was the leader of his crew. Almost from the get-go, his moral authority to lead is being challenged, first by Simon, then by Jayne, and more quietly, by all the others. Assuming I'd never seen Firefly (obviously an unrealistic assumption . . .), I would be wondering just why this crew was listening to him, and following him on what was by any standards a foolhardy plan. I just didn't feel like he had earned it, his ultimate (and somewhat miraculous, IMHO) conversion to belief and redemption, by his victory over the Operative, notwithstanding.

But, you know, I'm just tugging at the various threads of doubt I had/have. I do want to be clear: I thought it was a very good movie. And some of the things others have criticized, e.g. what we've been referring to as BDD#2, were pretty damn effective from my point of view.

SoddingNancyTribe | June 27, 08:17 CET

I don't know why all these complaints about the reavers flying ships have started up. They flew ships in the show too and no one seemed to mind.

When I go into a movie I'm just there to enjoy the cinematography, acting, and writing. I don't go into a movie looking for flaws or things to nitpick. I wait til subsequent viewings to be annoyed at plot holes or characterization. And a really great movie will hold up in those 2nd, 3rd, 4th viewings. I hope Serenity can pull that off!

[ edited by eddy on 2005-06-27 06:25 ]

eddy | June 27, 08:20 CET

Ya'll are overthinking and overanalyzing. It's a movie. We are all hanging our hopes and thoughts for future prospects in the 'verse on this, but we have to just frickin' chill.

We love it, we maybe hate...a part or two... but fuck! Calm down! This isn't the second coming (spoken from an atheist)! Everyone is getting so worked up and analytical. I know, I know, we haven't had anything new for a LONG time in our beloved Jossverse, but man...let it be what it is!

I love Serenity. It's a new chapter, a new incredibly detailed story for both us and the uninitiated. And it needs to be talked about, but let's not get scary. There will be more. And hopefully, even more. So can we just enjoy what we've got here? Can we talk about this without so much wanking, spec, and prediction? I still want to decipher what it is that's been given to us here. The solid stuff.

Willowy | June 27, 09:05 CET

Actually, Willowy, with all due respect, I'm perfectly calm. I was trying to express why certain elements didn't work for me. And I didn't go into the movie looking for flaws or things to nitpick - although I confess that I have a critical mind. But, aren't we here to engage in discussion about Joss's work? Or is this josswhedonrules.com? Anyway, I've said my piece. /SNT.

SoddingNancyTribe | June 27, 09:18 CET

All my worries about the movie resonating with newbies went away the first time the movie started, and resumed in varying degrees once it finished. That first viewing for me was a purely selfish exercise. My joy at actually getting a movie in the first place kicked in. My second viewing was when I paid a different kind of attention to dialogue, characters, and their effect on, and possible success with, the general audience. (Wash and Zoe being married being one example. I didn't remember it being clearly established because I, of course, already knew that, but it was.) I spent a good amount of the third viewing enjoying the updates that had been made to the film, and gauging audience reaction.

I loved this movie - and I'm glad I did. There are, as is to be expected, Firefly fans that ended up not liking Serenity. I really feel for them, whatever their reasons.

Television obviously affords much more time (provided, of course, the show isn't canceled) to develop arcs, plans, and even simply things like travel. (I know, duh.) One of the things I've always loved about the Whedonverse is the attention to detail. Vastly more often than not, holes are not left in the story. Details are explained. However, we all have many times provided the "filler" for those things that were a tad unclear. The "how" and "why" that may not have been crystal clear. Space seeming very small at times in Serenity? Hey - everything just happened to take place in one small corner of it. I think Spike got to Africa awfully quickly in S6. Angel was going to travel by cargoship, for months, to Asia to hide The Judge's arm and avoid sunlight on the way. So Spike really hustled. The Reavers being savage killers but powering spaceships? Ok. The explanation in the movie didn't say that they became that way, but lost all ability to do anything else. Being nothing but a savage killer, and technologically capable as means to that end, doesn't need to be mutually exclusive.

All just my thoughts. All I know is I'll continue to loan out my Firefly sets, and will be buying tickets to be raffled off at my work for opening weekend. I respect less than glowing opinions of the film - I just don't want our focus on the possible problems the film may have connecting with the general audience (all from a place of love, I know) to filter into the general consciousness and suddenly be a fact. "Don't go Mary Sue, it's not good unless you've seen the show. Far too confusing." I remember Mission Impossible. People were saying it was too confusing, and while I managed to have enough faith in my own level of intelligence to not buy into it, hearing it over and over just cooled my drive to see it.

ETA: I want to be clear that I don't mean our intelligent, honest discourse regarding our likes and dislikes of the film here, in Whedonesque, in the bottom of the above paragraph. I meant in the reviews (though this one I felt was well thought out and not flaming the film on any one issue, and in, um, other places. ;)

(Sheesh. I've been slowly working my way through this post for the last hour of Into the West. Took me long enough.)

[ edited by Angela on 2005-06-27 07:29 ]

Angela | June 27, 09:26 CET

How is it a lukewarm review if he gives it 3 stars out of 4? And I feel like I'm suffering from Serenity review overkill at the moment. It can only get worse.

Simon | June 27, 10:39 CET

Good point. Not taking it personally, not a bit, but there's a bit of underestimating going on here and there of non-Firefly initiates like me. I knew almost nothing about 'Firefly', but I 'got' the characters and their relationships in 'Serenity'. So much so that it's the selling point of the film for me. So much so that I quickly bought the DvDs and am burning through them one a night.

The series so far has the same 'feel' for me (I've watched up to 'Safe'), as far as character relationships go. It feels very leisurely, storytelling wise, compared to the film (which was breakneck pace). But that is a pleasure in itself.

Now I'm looking forward to seeing the film in September from a brand new perspective, having seen all the episodes (multiple times!)

Merrin | June 27, 11:30 CET

I find it interesting that we continue to get comments about how Serenity might not work well for people that have not see Firefly, despite that fact that I personally have lost count of how many positive comments and reviews I have read from people that have not seen Firefly and positive comments from people that that taken along friends who have never seen Firefly.

It seems to me that the general public is more convinced about Serenity's universal appeal (no pun intended), than we Firefly fans are, which is silly, because it was that universal appeal of Firefly that has made it so successful on DVD. Why wouldn't the universal appeal that attracted so many fans to Firefly also attack viewers to Serenity? If you watched one of the best episodes of Firefly most people would be instantly hooked and to say that Serenity might not appeal to the general public is like saying that it isn’t as good a one of Firefly best episodes and I'm pretty damb sure that it is. Not that I have seen it yet.

[ edited by Zoic_Fan on 2005-06-27 13:38 ]

Zoic_Fan | June 27, 15:31 CET

bobtaylor: The Reavers can fly spaceships BECAUSE IT MAKES THE MOVE MORE EXCITING. Good enough for me.

I must respectfully disagree. I think the Reavers can fly spaceships because they already knew how to fly spaceships before the Alliance greatly enhanced their aggressive tendencies...without diminishing their knowledge, experience, and capabilities. In other words, they are rational, capable human beings whose sole purpose in life is to rape, pillage, ravage, and engage in cannibalism.

It all makes perfect sense, actually.

Chris inVirginia | June 27, 18:09 CET

Plus, the reaver ships were not perfectly maintained. "Operating without containment" does not sound like the reavers were expert ship mechanics. The analogy I used to explain it to a friend goes something like this: "It's like riding the horses until they die and then stealing a new horse." That's how it made sense to me. They are motivated and creative; that's really all they need.

brownishcoat | June 27, 18:46 CET

The Reavers being able to fly spaceships makes sense to me, too. I honestly do not get why this is a sticking point. Nowhere in the movie or the series is it said that Reavers are without brains and abilities.

When we see Reavers in Firefly and Serenity, they are on their raiding parties and are violence-crazed agents of frenzied death. But more than that we do not know besides the bits of fear-laden folklore espoused by our faithful crew (much of which we find out is wrong in Serenity). We are never shown Reavers beyond their raiding parties. Two possibilities occur to me, not mutually exclusive: (1) It's entirely feasible to me that Reavers are capable of less frenzied behavior in-between such raids. Perhaps Reavers are much more - very much more - intense versions of Norse Beserkers. (2) What Chris in Virginia said. Reavers were once normal human beings. Why should having their aggressive tendencies ratcheted up into the stratosphere mean they've lost their ability to do, to organize, to think? Since when does ferocious bloodlust equate with retardation or inability to focus? Even rabid dogs have craft and cunning. I'd like to comment in more depth on this but I don't want to give away too much detail from Serenity.

[ edited by phlebotinin on 2005-06-27 17:19 ]

phlebotinin | June 27, 19:15 CET

I guess I am just selfish, but I went into the movie only interested in watching the movie; taking whatever ride Joss had put together. I left the analysis for another time. That is how I try to watch things the first time, because you can never get a first impression again. (Yeah, I know I get double points for 2 cliches in one phrase.) I save the analysis for later. I drop disbelief at the door and only invite it back when the lights come on or if the movie insists on it. In Serenity's case, I just had a great but exhausting time.

I agree with Chris inVA, brownishcoat & phlebotin about the Reavers.

Another thing I've read but do not understand is why it should be considered a flaw that the movie does not explain anything about Inara's job. It just is not really important to the story. Flans know and so do not need a full explanation. Non-flans do not, but since it has no impact on the story, they do not need a full explanation either. It is obvious that there is history with Mal, (and the crew) that they care about each other and that there are self-imposed problems of some sort between them. It is one of the things that says, "Don't you want another movie so we can see what happens with these two?"

I think there was a lot more impied about the characters relationships than people realize. Interestingly enough, it was the Kaylie/Simon that hit a wrong note for me. It seemed disjointed. When Simon finally was honest with Kaylie it slipped into being sappy, then Joss did his usual and pulled it back with Kaylie's reaction, but for me it did not quite work. I am hoping that it needed the right music or something and that it will be fixed by opening night. There was another moment with someone else like that near the end too, but I do not remember what it was.

nitpicking: The multiple 360's on Miranda seemed a little stagey, I got a bit lost in the movement of the ships when they are running from the reavers at the beginning, and I'm sure there are a few other things like that, but they are just incredibly minor and did not affect my enjoyment of the movie.

There is more, but I am drawing a blank and this is long enough anyway.

newcj | June 27, 19:38 CET

Regarding Inara's profession -- I wondered if Joss intended to downplay her position so as not to offend a potentially significant portion of the audience (or their parents, as the case may be). I don't know what time(s)Firefly aired on Fox, as I was sadly unaware of the series at the time, but wasn't it on during "adult" viewing times? And isn't Serenity getting a PG-13 rating? Perhaps Joss wants to build up the fan base and then deal with her later? Dunno. Just thinkin'.

palehorse | June 27, 20:54 CET

I agree with newcj. Serenity is already chock-full enough of plot and characterization without needing to bring in Inara's full backstory. Not having access to Joss's huge brain, I'm making pure assumptions, of course. We as flans perhaps feel a bit of discombobulation that this isn't featured in Serenity, but for newbies? They don't need to know this to get into Serenity's story. In a two hour movie, Joss cannot accommodate the kind of detailed exposition and backstory for nine characters that 15 hours of TV can.

As to whether Joss self-censored the nature of Inara's profession because of the viewing audience, that's an interesting question. Hmmm. I have a hard time believing that the PG-13 audience is permitted to see/hear the level of violence in Serenity but the idea of whores is just too much. And yet.....this is America. Then again, isn't the nature of Inara's profession hinted at, just a little bit? Did I imagine this?

phlebotinin | June 27, 21:10 CET

How hard can it be to fly a spaceship?

IMMORTAL | June 27, 21:19 CET

Then again, isn't the nature of Inara's profession hinted at, just a little bit? Did I imagine this?

You did not. When Mal is watching the "capture" of Inara before she left the ship, there is a reference to something like all the clients she's entertained in her bed on the shuttle.

But it was passing, and not highlighted (unless you consider as "highlighting" the fact that River is seen bending down to sniff the bed).

The One True b!X | June 27, 21:51 CET

I agree with those who have no problem with the Reavers. Newcj-I feel exactly the same way about Kaylee/Simon.

After leaving the theatre the one thing that I really missed was seeing the whole crew sharing a meal in the dining room. Somehow those moments really created a sense of "crew" that I was longing for and even just a few minutes of that would have helped make it more emotional IMO.

I loved the movie though and think some great points were made by Zachsmind and Plebotinin regarding the experience of a non-fan vs fan. Merrin, thanks for the report! I hope many newbies share your experience come September!

SaltyGoodness | June 27, 22:10 CET

When I saw the film and that River part happened, me and this one other guy somewhere were laughing our butts off, but no one else seemed to catch it. My friend looked at me like I was crazy and I had to explain it to him later. :p

[ edited by RogueScribner on 2005-06-27 22:26 ]

RogueScribner | June 28, 00:26 CET

The only thing that worries me is, will almost everyone in the US get to see the unfinished film in all the numerous test screenings, and then they won't bother to see the real thing?

And, Immortal, I agree about the difficulty or otherwise of flying a spaceship. Stormtroopers seemed to do it OK (as did Chewbacca!) and there wasn't a huge amount of brainpower on show there:)

SweetMarilyn | June 28, 00:59 CET

RogueScribner, there was general laughter at the NJ/NYC showing. I had totally forgotten about that scene until it was mentioned though. Of course I forgot about a lot of scenes, there was so much to digest and as I said, I was just goin' with the ride.

Sweetmarilyn, No worries there. If people liked it, they will go see it again. (I wanted to see it again right then, even though I was really drained by the whole thing.) I think this is going to be one of those movies where if friends have not seen it, there is enough going on that people will not mind seeing it again. If they did not like it, someone said that the previews are being counted as part of the first weekend receipts so it will still count.

newcj | June 28, 01:49 CET

SweetMarilyn - "will almost everyone in the US get to see the unfinished film in all the numerous test screenings, and then they won't bother to see the real thing"

I don't know anyone who has seen a screening (Myself included) who is not going to see the film in September. :)

The number of people who have seen the screenings number in the few thousands (lots of repeats)... the number of people who want to see the screenings number in the tens, possibly hundreds of thousands. The DVD sales have increased dramatically (top ten at Amazon for over a week) and the airing (on Sci-Fi) next month will only increase the number of initated fans... I really think this film is going to surprise everyone at the box office, bad/Luke warm reviews or not. :)

SpookyRiverFan | June 28, 03:56 CET

Right with you there, SpookyRiverFan...I saw both screenings in DC...I will be dragging people into the theater multiple times in October and probably (I hope!) beyond.

My wife is on an aggressive recruitment campaign at her work...bringing in my spare DVD sets and lending them strategically to people she is sure will not only love Firefly but will be overcome with the evangelical fervor...I think it's what economists call the multiplier affect...

Chris inVirginia | June 28, 04:10 CET

My kids didn't get to go with me to the screening (my first), so that's three more right there.

And the repeat viewings are what will make the wait for the DVD bearable!

brownishcoat | June 28, 04:13 CET

brownishcoat, my 21 year old son went to the first screening with me (he had his picture taken, hugging Morenna!), and he's going to be dragooning people into the theater...I don't know, but I'm smelling breakout blockbuster hit...

Chris inVirginia | June 28, 04:33 CET

SweetMarilyn, I will see Serenity again, multiple times, when it hits theaters officially. I will see it as many times as I had planned originally, before I ever got tickets to screenings. How many times? Many, many times. I will hit the theater especially hard during the first and second weekends. And I shall rope in anyone I can to join me.

From what I've read on browncoats, here, and fff.net, many, many - most? - of lucky screening folk are also desperately desirous of seeing Serenity again, as soon as possible. I know exactly how they feel.

I don't think you or anyone need worry about the screenings dampening desire to see the finished product. If anything the screenings have amped up interest and devotion among large portions of fflanhood, not to mention sent the Firefly DVD sales rocketing into the top 10 of the Amazon DVD bestsellers list. Plus they've garnered fantastic free publicity at several newspapers around the U.S. and in Canada. Yup, I'd say the screenings have been a very smart business strategy on Universal's part.

phlebotinin | June 28, 07:29 CET

This is not a movie that can be seen only once. This is not a movie that can be seen only ten times. I'm just saying.

TamaraC | June 28, 10:18 CET

I'm grateful for seeing the film early, but it wasn't a finished product and I want to see it in all its glory in September. I can't imagine any fan who went to a screening not seeing it again!

RogueScribner | June 28, 12:30 CET

And by the time September gets here, I'll have forgotten most of the small(er?) details. It will be fresh and I'll have to see it again to pick up things I missed the first 2 times.

brownishcoat | June 28, 21:19 CET