(SPOILER)
WHYY's Patrick Stoner reviews Serenity.
(Real Audio) This is the first NPR review I've come across, so I thought it needed to be posted.
NPR (and especially WHYY) used to be huge Whedon afficionados, with David Bianculli as their TV critic and so on, and generally taking an interest in cutting edge pop culture. Lately however there seems to have been a bit of a Whedon void. For example, they saw fit to interview "History of Violence" director David Cronenberg on "Fresh Air" yesterday, but they've been silent on the subject of "Serenity" on that show, so far.
This reviewer, Stoner, really liked "Serenity" -- he gives it 2 1/2 out of 4 stars, waxing enthusiastic about it through most of the review, but then saying at the end that he doesn't want to "over-praise" it, saying that it is "lighter" than Star Wars but "heavier" than Star Trek, and can't hope to compete with them (but doesn't necessarily need to do so). He concludes, In spite of some obscurities in the plot, it's a good ride!
EDIT: It's worth noting that the previously-linked and wonderful Slate review is by David Edelstein, who is WHYY's movie critic, so I hope this means he'll get a chance to air his wonderful review on Fresh Air at some point. (I don't know how WHYY decides which movies to review on-air.) This would be wonderful exposure for "Serenity" -- many people (I am a good example) do look to NPR for thoughtful movie reviews and are more likely to see a film if the NPR critic likes it.
October 04 2005
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
Star Wars was never particularly thought-provoking. Unless you count the broad philosophical strokes of the "Force," or the attempt at a political theme in the latest batch of films. And Lucas hits you over the head with that stuff.
I like the Original Trilogy and all, but that was more of a popcorn movie than "Serenity" is. "Serenity," though it has humor and good action, is a dark film throughout, with something to say about humanity and belief that runs underneath it all.
SW had droids with emotion, walking carpets, laser swords, a backwards talking Muppet, and jokes about Bantha Poo Doo. SW is what I'd call a "fun ride," and just that.
Empire got darker, but not "heavier" than "Serenity," imo, and besides, it was all washed away by Jedi and those gorramn Ewoks.
pat32082 | October 04, 18:57 CET
rbt | October 04, 19:12 CET
zeitgeist | October 04, 19:39 CET
IMForeman | October 04, 19:40 CET
IMForeman said it well.
Edit: And Serenity handles its themes of humanity and belief and freedom beautifully, but I felt there was no need to give Ava Maria lessons to the choir...
[ edited by RBB on 2005-10-04 18:45 ]
RBB | October 04, 20:42 CET
I'm not denying SW's impact. "A New Hope" had a huge one, especially because of the time in which it was released. Do I think "Serenity" will have as huge a cultural impact? Doubtful. Archetypes whose goal it is to destroy an easily identifiable thing of evil (the Death Star) is more accessible than sometimes morally gray characters who are just fighting against a belief system.
But I do think, depending on what you're looking for and comparing on a film level, "Serenity" could be argued to be the better film, than Episode IV, the first of the only trilogy I'll acknowledge ;-). The dialogue is meatier, the characters more complex (not that there's anything wrong with SW's archetypes--Vader is iconic, after all--but the Operative for instance, is an evil human being, whereas Vader is an evil, classic villain), the story has more resonance (it's not just pure escapism).
And frankly, I don't know if I want the crew to become as iconic as Luke, Leia, and Han. If that happens, they start to become more than the "only human" characters they are, imo, when the whole point is that they're just the future's version of working class people. They ascend to another level that they themselves would shy away from.
Until "Serenity" gets its trilogy (please oh please), it's an unfair comparison, I know, but that's how I feel right now.
[ edited by pat32082 on 2005-10-04 19:43 ]
pat32082 | October 04, 21:41 CET
The Star Wars prequels fail to do that entirely, because the serious stuff is mostly so badly written and acted that it's hard to take seriously, and there is barely any humour. Yes, the action is still exciting, but I prefer the less CGI action and characters of the OT.
And if I really had to compare the OT with Serenity, Serenity is definitely much darker and heavier. Yes, the OT does have a lot of important themes, but these aren't dealt with very thoroughly or ambiguously, and it is generally suitable for children to watch.
Serenity, and Firefly, present many of the important themes such as love, death, redemption, betrayal, sex... and present them with several points of view. For example, Mal and Inara's views on Companion-ing, which I doubt would ever be discussed in Star Wars. Contrast their relationship which works on so many layers with the very touching and funny, but much more sraightforward relationship of Han and Leia.
And Serenity is much darker visually, the violence is more realistic and brutal. I don't think the Reavers would have any place in Star Wars.
Razor | October 05, 00:45 CET
Cygnet | October 05, 00:54 CET
GimpyD | October 05, 01:18 CET
Anna von Ovonov | October 05, 03:01 CET