Whedonesque : Comments on 8439 : Washington Browncoat goes above and beyond.

I was a little confused there for a second. Two stories in one article. Anyhoo, that is crazy.

He's having too much fun!

"He's a big fan of 'Firefly' and wants the (box office) numbers high enough that the studio will make more of the movies," Child said the man told him. >>>

This doesn't help, nice as the gesture was. It will not be lost on the studios that the sales are being artificially inflated by such antics.

Dana5140 | October 11, 06:38 CET

I don't see how the studio would care, 50 tickets sold is 50 tickets sold. If I brought a theater full of people I know to a screening of Serenity, the guy whose going through the sales for that theater isn't going to stop say "well this one sold more than the others... it doesn't count." 356 tickets aren't all that big a blip, and his hearts in the right (but seriously kind of weird) place, but every bit helps I guess.

rabid | October 11, 06:43 CET

I imagine he didn't do it to add 0.0025 million to the box office, I imagine he did it to get people to see the movie who wouldn't otherwise see it, hoping that they would then tell other people about it.

jam2 | October 11, 07:00 CET

Heh, Succatash, I was thinking the same thing as I posted this. I think it's really cool. This explains why there were reports of sold out Vancouver showings last weekend. If anybody knows who this guy is, tell him the PDX Browncoats want to buy him dinner and beer.

[ edited by electricspacegirl on 2005-10-11 05:50 ]

electricspacegirl | October 11, 07:05 CET

I'm really having a hard time deciding whether to be against this man or happy for him.

On the one hand, that's a couple of hundred dollars that could have been better spent. On the other, these kinds of things show the media just how crazy people are for Joss and will hopefully benefit his work.

Christopher | October 11, 07:13 CET

I don't know whether to shake his hand or admit him into the bouncy pillow room.

Turtle | October 11, 07:13 CET

SpaceChannelFive over on FFF.Net apparently knows the guy.

StakeTheLurk | October 11, 07:16 CET

Joss Whedon is not a struggling fringe artist. He's a commercial filmmaker with two greenlit mainstream Hollywood movie projects beyond Serenity... Giving money charitably to Universal Studios is like giving money charitably to Burger King. They are doing quite well without your charity, sir. This person who spent this money in this manner is a fool. In this era when art and music programs in the public schools are being slashed and eliminated for lack of funds, when teachers are being laid off, when there are homeless kids on the streets, this fellow should look to his own community and support those who don't have $40 million at their disposal to make an action movie. Help someone who actually needs it. If Joss Whedon actually gets to the point where he needs charitable donations to make his movies & TV shows, wait and give the money to him then. At this point, it's a ridiculously lavish gesture and insult to the very concept of charitable giving. Wake up and look at the reality of the world we are living in -- there are people living within blocks of this guy who probably can't afford to buy their children shoes. It makes me sick.

Serapion | October 11, 07:17 CET

Its his money. I wish I had that much to "waste"!

eddy | October 11, 07:18 CET

He must be the guy who was about to donate to the Variety ad and was talked out of it.

Succatash | October 11, 07:20 CET

Hmm, not knowing the fellow how do we know he is not also donating to charities as well as doing this sort of thing. He obviously has some spare cash. And if we're going to jump all over this guy for spending his own money on something like this instead of donating to a worthy cause then we should be condemning every rich celebrity out there who spends their money on frivolous things and aren't contributing to the welfare of the needy. Heck, we should be condeming every fan who has gone and seen the movie multiple times because their money could've been better spent. My point is, who are we to judge what this person does with their own money, everyone at some point is spending their own money in what other people might consider a frivolous manner. I for one collect all the Buffy Sideshow figures because I love them, they aren't a necessity, they just make me happy. I do give money to charitable causes but should I do without stuff that makes me happy and give all my spare money away just because their are needy people in the world? I don't think this poor guy is responsible for the world - it's his own money - let him do what he wants with it and blame the government for school fundings being slashed and homeless people on the streets.

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 07:35 CET

Well said, Blwessels.

electricspacegirl | October 11, 07:50 CET

Serapion, while its perfectly alright to disagree with what he did, its not necessary to call him a fool.

zeitgeist | October 11, 08:02 CET

I can easily concede the point that people can do with their own money as they please. I cannot abide by this concept of charitable giving to a major Hollywood action movie that opened in second place at the nationwide box office. There is such a thing as perspective. Such extreme public activism in the name of securing a sequel to a multimillion dollar entertainment product of a supremely wealthy corporation is obscene. We're not talking a film with pretentions to anything beyond making the audience go "wow, cool -- that was fun" here.

Most of the fiction books written in the world each year don't get the audience that Serenity has gotten already. Yet their authors manage to carry on without crusades of evangelists giving away their books. Joss Whedon is going to be just fine without these masturbatory displays of guerilla activism in the name of a $40 million dollar sci-fi kung fu movie. If the cause was truly so dire, and these Serenity stories were truly so important to be told, Whedon could get out the typewriter and write up the scripts and print them on the internet for free. Apparently, they are actually things he does for money in the hopes that audiences will support them by paying to go see them. I sincerely doubt his plan was to write a movie that couldn't survive on its own merits, a movie that needed strangers in far flung cities to sacrifice their own funds and free time in order to buy tickets for people who can't be bothered to otherwise see the film.

[ edited by Serapion on 2005-10-11 06:07 ]

Serapion | October 11, 08:04 CET

Was the man claiming this was charitable giving? Do you seriously see nothing in Serenity but a gee whiz action flick? If that's the case I might suggest you see it again (of course, its not necessary that you buy 300+ tickets...).

zeitgeist | October 11, 08:07 CET

Who says this was charitable giving? This guy just loves Firefly and wants to do what he can to try and make sure there is a sequel. Yes, it's frivolous spending on his part but it is his money. I think you are putting way to much into this. It's just a fan going a bit overboard in his desire to see this film succeed.

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 08:10 CET

Heck, who knows, maybe some of those tickets that he gave away went to some people who were struggling for cash and they were grateful for it.

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 08:11 CET

I think "gee whiz action flicks" are just fine. Serenity was indeed a "gee whiz action flick" -- it is full of action sequences that are intended to make the audience spontaneously go "wow, cool." That is what they are designed to do. In between and during those scenes we get some humorous dialogue and very occasionally we are given observations on human nature and political subjects. But those observations seem obviously in second place to the action movie plot. If they were removed the movie would not cease functioning, while if the action scenes were removed there wouldn't be much left.

Serapion | October 11, 08:13 CET

*suspicious*

Was Joss Whedon anywhere near Vancouver on September 30th?

Bad Kitty | October 11, 08:13 CET

This is really creepy. Things like this just add fuel to the fire for people who want to see the Browncoats as a little mentally unhinged. Plus, it really does seem like that money could have been better spent. Sure, America's a free country, and you can dispose of your property and money however you wish--but come on. Just because there's not a legal limit doesn't mean there isn't a rational one.

BAFfler | October 11, 08:20 CET

"Joss Whedon is going to be just fine without these masturbatory displays of guerilla activism in the name of a $40 million dollar sci-fi kung fu movie."

"If the cause was truly so dire, and these Serenity stories were truly so important to be told, Whedon could get out the typewriter and write up the scripts and print them on the internet for free."

Ouch! Where am I?

Succatash | October 11, 08:22 CET

Was Joss Whedon anywhere near Vancouver on September 30th?

If so, he was incognito. Lots of fans were in that theater that night and would have spotted him. And actually 2 of them were unable to see it because the showings were sold out.

electricspacegirl | October 11, 08:22 CET

Well, I certainly know where you stand, Serapion.

Obviously, there are other ways to "donate" one's money. And I don't necessarily disagree with any particular point you're making. It's just the force with which you speak. A guy spent his own money and gave tickets out to people walking up to the cinema. He likely enjoyed himself, as we can assume did most of the people who took him up on a free ticket. If the guy were jumping around on a pulpit, screeching and drooling, I might support your label of evangelist. Also, that's the part that would be creepy. Kindly offering people free entertainment for two hours with a smile and a wave doesn't have to be inherently creepy. It could be, dare I say, the one random act of kindness some of the people who got tickets experienced that day.

And in much the same way that Joss or Universal likely have no complaints on how all those tickets were purchased, neither would any author and publishing company who had a fan do the same thing. Despite being able to survive without the help.

Is it simply Universal's finances and JW's name recognition that makes this man's actions so disagreeable? Because I see lots of fans devoting time to unsigned bands by running around and putting up flyers to advertise gigs. Is the band's finances justification for such evangelising? Many people devote time and money to running sites like this one - and there are plenty of sad, sad people who would say that is frivolous. That money could be donated - that time spent in a soup kitchen.

Like I said, I don't disagree that there are more "worthy" causes that his money could have contributed to. I just wonder who should be in such a position to define for others what is worthy of their time and money.

Angela | October 11, 08:24 CET

I actually think the movie does more than give a few moments to observations on human nature and political subjects. The major arcs of the movie are in fact tied up observations on faith/belief, love/sacrifice, the so called right-to-be-wrong, etc. Topics to be hashed out another time, perhaps. Sleepy now :)

zeitgeist | October 11, 08:24 CET

In case, Succatash, that you are implying that I'm not sufficiently appreciative of Mr. Whedon's works, and thus am in the wrong forum, I would like to clarify that I have seen every TV show and movie the guy has written, and read most of the comic books -- though not the licensed ones written by other people.

I think Whedon is a talented and fascinating writer. However I also think that he is a shrewd Hollywood player -- he comes from a family of screenwriters. This is not the sort of naive artiste who needs charitable help in order to survive the dangerous waters of Hollywood. He was born there. The BUSINESS of writing is in his blood and he can fend for himself. I would think a seasoned pro like Joss would be offended that people think a movie he made needs charitable help, needs people buying tickets and giving them away. This is a guy who from the start has aimed to create blockbuster cultural phenomena, rather than simply tell stories. He doesn't need you spending thousands of your own money to keep him in the Hollywood game. It makes him look weak, when he's anything but. The guy is a player, and I respect him for it. You should too. Instead I see people treating him like a damaged bird in need of mending, buying "pity tickets" to his movie. Jesus.

Serapion | October 11, 08:35 CET

It is, in an unprecedented sense, your movie...

And also...

If this movie matters to you, let somebody know. Let everybody know. Make yourselves heard.

I just don't see how Joss would, or should, be offended. Fans helped catapult this canceled TV series to the big screen, and are simply hoping there is more to come. Offensive to Joss? This? Nah.

Angela | October 11, 08:46 CET

Well, lookee here. We got fandom_wanked.

I love fandom_wank. I'm all honored and shit. Drinks on me.

Allyson | October 11, 09:00 CET

Angela, you're right that Joss made a point of making us part of this process. But as soon as people said they were buying tickets for strangers or buying extra tickets for no one, I thought "this isn't what Joss had in mind".

In the end, I can accept people buying tickets for strangers as a way of "making yourself heard". I'm more bothered by some people buying extra tickets that no one ever used.

jam2 | October 11, 09:11 CET

And maybe everyone here takes a silly lark by a guy with too much money way too seriously. I find the whole thing funny and uplifting. Can everyone just have a drink and chill? Please.

TamaraC | October 11, 09:18 CET

jam2, I concede that it would be bad if fans were buying up tickets for no one that resulted in crowds of people constantly being turned away while there are only the 16 people who bought out the theater sitting inside. If that has happened at all, it hasn't been happening to any noticeable degree.

Joss hasn't been putting conditions and stipulations on the supportive actions of fans. Why should any of us?

TamaraC - let's grab Allyson and go have that drink. She's buying. :)

Angela | October 11, 09:23 CET

Angela, I'll even buy if you can drag her out of her house.

TamaraC | October 11, 09:24 CET

Sure. You tell me where she lives, and I'll go get her She'll appreciate the stranger with the rope and cattle prod, right? ;)

Angela | October 11, 09:28 CET

Wow, congrats on the fandom wank Allyson and others :-)
And count me among those that think some on this thread seem to be taking this guy's actions a tad too seriously. Handing out a few hundred Serenity tickets? No, not my prefered way of spending $3,000 or so spare bucks. But then again, there are people who might quibble with the choice to spend too much money on shoes, a trip to Australia, a meal at Charlie Trotter's, or a new sportscar when so many more worthy things could be done with the money. As a few others have pointed out, this guy wasn't making a charitable donation to Universal, he was just choosing a way he wanted to spend some money – and certainly a less selfish way than many other people might choose to spend it. If he has that much to spare on movie tickets, my guess is that he's making plenty of charitable donations as well. But here's to frivolous spending, and the lucky passers-by who happened to snag a ticket. Now about that drink...

acp | October 11, 09:44 CET

Sounds like something that could backfire, especially after making the news. Will people say "oh my, if it means that much to fans I should check it out" or "oh god, that movie must be really bad if fans have to give away tickets for free to get someone to watch it"? Maybe he happens to be rich and a few thousand bucks don't matter to him. But if he's not, I doubt even Joss would want single fans to spend THAT much money on promoting his movies. "Money they could use". Flattering, but also kind of disturbing.

Trienco | October 11, 09:46 CET

Disturbing or amusing. Pretty fine line. I have certainly seen much more disturbing behavior in this fandom than his. More power to him, I say.

TamaraC | October 11, 10:04 CET

I wouldn't exactly call that disturbing either. A little over the top yes, but disturbing no. There's a lot more things going on this world that are "disturbing" than some guy throwing his own money away on what most people would feel is a frivolous thing.

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 10:10 CET

Well at least no one can accuse the fandom of being dull.

Simon | October 11, 10:29 CET

I cannot abide by this concept of charitable giving to a major Hollywood action movie that opened in second place at the nationwide box office.

Thing is, I don't think this person needs to you or me or anyone else here to 'abide' anything he does. Because it's none of our business anyway. If someone decides to do something what seems outrageous to most people with his own money, then I'm happy he at least did something nice. 'Disturbing' would be if he was standing by the theater with a sign 'Joss is God' and yelling at passerby who buy tickets to other movies.

As others pointed out already, for all we know this guy gives more to charity a year than all of us combined. I find it a little odd to get bent out of shape because some stranger of whom we know nothing about, decided to buy some other strangers movie tickets. I don't think anyone would dub it 'charity' to being with.

Serenity is an unlikely, original, bold project in a business whose products are more and more cookie cutter per year and where there is practically no room for smaller or off-beat projects. It is made by people who really cared about it instead of just cashing their paycheck and smiling at Leno and who themselves have gone above and beyond for it and have been very kind to fans. Some people care about that and want to help it out. That's all Sure on a level it's also selfish because they would love to see more of those movies. And that's people's own business.

Well, lookee here. We got fandom_wanked.

So we did. And apparenlty just daring to disagree with Devin makes one 'rabid' and 'insane'. Of course like Devin himself she doesn't go near the actual points of the discussion with a ten-foot pole but why should that even surprise me. Next time let's just all instantly agree with an article even if we don't actually agree with it. Don't wanna be called 'rabid' after all...

EdDantes | October 11, 11:41 CET

Yeah, but on the plus side, Ed, I'm "awesome." So it can't be all bad, can it? ;)

SoddingNancyTribe | October 11, 11:44 CET

It's none of our business, my dear Count? It was a public performance done for public consumption, to prove himself as a superfan above all others for his superfan friends. Why else would someone stand around in public and hand out $3,000 worth of tickets in a parking lot full of people who arrived there intending to see other movies, and with ready cash to buy tickets to those other movies? We don't have to know this guy's name for him to quietly bask in the glow of having gloriously served his newfound messiah -- a two hour action movie with vibrator jokes.

This is sick stuff, folks. People identifying with a corporate entertainment product to the point of losing perspective on the meaning that corporate entertainment product could possibly have on their livves as mature, responsible adults in a country which is at war and sacrificing the lives of our own soldiers and the people of Iraq every hour of every day. Wake up and pay attention to what's really going on... Maybe spending $3,000 to promote this movie will be a little tiny bit less important to this guy if he recognizes his tax dollars are being used to do things every bit as bad as what went down on the fictional planet of Miranda. Oy freakin vey.

Serapion | October 11, 12:06 CET

Well, fandom_wank is definitely snarky, but I'd take that last remark with a grain of salt. I took issue with it too, because it wasn't the point. The point was that the rabid, creepy fans are a small minority, just very vocal, and CHUD, AICN, etc. are making us ALL out to a bunch of cultish loonies.

I still haven't met one of these "creepy fans" I keep hearing about. I don't agree that this man giving out 300+ Serenity tickets is one of them.

Serapion, could you not post Serenity movie spoilers in a non-spoiler thread please? I've seen the movie but much of the world has not. There are people at this site trying to remain spoiler-free.

[ edited by electricspacegirl on 2005-10-11 10:34 ]

electricspacegirl | October 11, 12:29 CET

It's none of our business, my dear Count? It was a public performance done for public consumption, to prove himself as a superfan above all others for his superfan friends.

How can you possibly claim to know the motivation of this person you admit to not knowing?

Why else would someone stand around in public and hand out $3,000 worth of tickets in a parking lot full of people who arrived there intending to see other movies, and with ready cash to buy tickets to those other movies?

Maybe he thought the movie was worth seeing? Who are you to judge what a person does with his or her money? This is like standing at a supermarket and waving a finger at anyone who buys an expensive brand. "Why are you buying more expensive milk, when you could buy cheaper milk? Don't you know what state the world is in?". It seems kinda silly to me, honestly.

We don't have to know this guy's name for him to quietly bask in the glow of having gloriously served his newfound messiah -- a two hour action movie with vibrator jokes.

Oh please. Don't you think you are going just a tad overboard with the religious wording here? Plus, I'd like to think that Serenity is more than 'a two hour action movie with vibrator jokes', but that may be just me then.

This is sick stuff, folks. People identifying with a corporate entertainment product

Honestly, isn't that what we do all the time? We love tv shows, movies, books and whatnot. Every single one of those things is a corporate entertainment product. And we tend to like those things, support those things and promote those things to share the experience with others. It's perfectly reasonable human behaviour.

Now I agree that buying a whole movie theatre worth of tickets is slightly over the top. But if I had bunches of money to spend, well, why ever not?

to the point of losing perspective on the meaning that corporate entertainment product could possibly have on their livves as mature, responsible adults in a country which is at war and sacrificing the lives of our own soldiers and the people of Iraq every hour of every day.

What could seeing a movie possibly have to do with politics, war or the lives of soldiers? How does spending money on something make you a less responsible adult?

Wake up and pay attention to what's really going on...

Yes, please. Someone spent a lot of money to buy tickets for strangers, that's what's going on. There is no place for what seems to me to be moral outrage at this fact.

Maybe spending $3,000 to promote this movie will be a little tiny bit less important to this guy if he recognizes his tax dollars are being used to do things every bit as bad as what went down on the fictional planet of Miranda. Oy freakin vey.

Maybe I shouldn't even be going into this, but what now? He spent his $3000 dollars supporting horrible things? Nope. He spent it buying movie tickets. Nothing more, nothing less.

I'd like to restate what EdDantes said so correctly:

Serenity is an unlikely, original, bold project in a business whose products are more and more cookie cutter per year and where there is practically no room for smaller or off-beat projects. It is made by people who really cared about it instead of just cashing their paycheck and smiling at Leno and who themselves have gone above and beyond for it and have been very kind to fans. Some people care about that and want to help it out. That's all. Sure on a level it's also selfish because they would love to see more of those movies. And that's people's own business.

I hereby auto-agree with anything EdDantes says on the subject (hmmm - wonder if that was wise ;-)).

ETA: fixed a quote

[ edited by GVH on 2005-10-11 10:47 ]

GVH | October 11, 12:44 CET

I agree with GVH agreeing with EdDantes. :)

electricspacegirl | October 11, 12:54 CET

I agree with electricspacegirl agreeing with GVH agreeing with EdDantes. So does my mom.

Richard The 3rd | October 11, 13:16 CET

What? Ben is Glory?

electricspacegirl | October 11, 13:19 CET

Ben is Glory! I gotta tell....what was that?

Richard The 3rd | October 11, 13:23 CET

Huh? Glory....is Ben?

Anyho, all consumerism is inherently evil. I wonder how many tickets he managed to give away?

bubblecat | October 11, 13:25 CET

Maybe he dissed Firefly earlier, and wants to make amends? ;)
Glory to (is?) him, then!

[ edited by onesnailshort on 2005-10-11 11:35 ]

onesnailshort | October 11, 13:33 CET

I had the crazy notion of finding out if myself (and maybe some of the rest of the fandom) could buy Firefly DVDs in bulk for a good deal on lots of 'em to get more out there, but it never got to be more than a vague idea of pre-movie promotion (or even giving them to newbies coming out of Serenity to watch after and grow more attached and increase the chances of them telling their friends). Plus I don't have money to burn. If I did though? I might do something fun like that guy did. Dunno if I'd post about it. I'm not quite ego-driven enough to care about other fans' praise for something like that, but I might

I don't think he was crazy. No idea if he did do it for recognition, I don't think it's fair to assume that. Who cares, he further contributed to the box office and he probably had fun handing people free tickets.

Kris | October 11, 13:39 CET

I had the crazy notion of finding out if myself (and maybe some of the rest of the fandom) could buy Firefly DVDs in bulk for a good deal on lots of 'em to get more out there, but it never got to be more than a vague idea of pre-movie promotion (or even giving them to newbies coming out of Serenity to watch after and grow more attached and increase the chances of them telling their friends). Plus I don't have money to burn. If I did though? I might do something fun like that guy did. Dunno if I'd post about it. I'm not quite ego-driven enough to care about other fans' praise for something like that, but I might.

Actually, he's not the one who posted about it. This was an article in a newspaper. The person who's been passing the info around online is a friend of his. She said he had no idea she was even doing that.

But I'm with you. I could see myself handing out the DVDs if I were rich or something.

[ edited by electricspacegirl on 2005-10-11 11:54 ]

electricspacegirl | October 11, 13:52 CET

Unless we want to get into a debate about the inequality of the distribution of wealth (and I certainly don't), what someone does with their money is largely their own business. Personally, I wouldn't spend my money in this manner, but that doesn't make it wrong. Since I do not know anything about the person or his motivation I can hardly criticise him. However, to be annoying and play devil's advocate, had this been someone doing the same thing for a different film (let's say 'Into the Blue' for argument's sake) I can't help but think that reaction to it here might not have been quite so positive in general.

alien lanes | October 11, 13:56 CET

People identifying with a corporate entertainment product to the point of losing perspective on the meaning that corporate entertainment product could possibly have on their lives as mature, responsible adults

Joss has always said he wanted to make a show (or movies) that a bunch of people needed to see, rather than a ton of people just wanted to see. That's not the statement of an artist whose desire is to make large-scale blockbusters. And I firmly believe as well that it's possible to be connected in the business, firmly within the power hierarchy of Hollywood, and still be an artist. Coppola was wrangled into doing The Godfather by the studio, and ended up making 2 films that are perhaps the greatest movies America has yet produced, films that are actiony and flashy and contain many soap opera elements, and is also a deeply personal statement about power, love and corruption of the soul.

Wake up and pay attention to what's really going on...

That's purely an assumption you're making on what this fragment of behavior, his actions on one afternoon, implies for his entire psyche.

dottikin | October 11, 14:03 CET

However, to be annoying and play devil's advocate, had this been someone doing the same thing for a different film (let's say 'Into the Blue' for argument's sake) I can't help but think that reaction to it here might not have been quite so positive in general.

Well, yes, I would have probably wondered why anyone would possibly want to spend that amount of money to promote that movie, since it doesn't seem to be a very good. And maybe I would've gone paranoid (hey, I'm only human) and discussed the option that it might have been an action of people wanting to see Serenity fail.

So, yes, the reaction would probably have been different. But I highly doubt that people would have condemned the act itself.

And also...what?! Ben is Glory?!

GVH | October 11, 14:10 CET

Well, it was a Friday, maybe he was a Joinee performing his raok? (Random Act of Kindness)

TheDivineGoat | October 11, 14:28 CET

If he just wanted Serenity to make money, he probably would have been better off sending a cheque to Universal.

However, how many of us have tried to persuade friends to watch Buffy or Angel or Firefly and been knocked back? I have a really good friend who loves Firefly, loved Serenity but still won't watch Buffy.

Despite this, the reaction of those who have seen Serenity has tended to be hugely positive. If everyone in America who has paid to watch Fightplan this week had also seen Serenity, how many would have truly left the cinema saying that they preferred the former.

Art and entertainment can be popular in two different ways. I would describe the difference as being between depth of popularity and breadth of popularity. This is the difference between a large number of people quite liking something and a smaller number absolutely loving it. It is this effect that has made dvd sales so important. The percentage of those who watch Flightplan who will want to buy the dvd will be far lower than the percentage of Serenity-watchers who choose to do the same.

It has been difficult to decide how best to get the word out and persuade people to see something that we're so sure they'll like. Giving away 320 tickets may seem like a waste of money or an overly ostentatious show of fandom, but if it created 10 new fans who end up loving Joss Whedon's writing as much as most of us do then surely that's a pretty impressive gift.

Jon | October 11, 14:54 CET

Guy spent his own money to get folks to see a film he liked. I don't see the issue at all.

auferstehen | October 11, 15:05 CET

Serapion: preaching at fellow posters is not a thing we tolerate here. Tone down your opinions.

Simon | October 11, 15:08 CET

I had the crazy notion of finding out if myself (and maybe some of the rest of the fandom) could buy Firefly DVDs in bulk for a good deal on lots of 'em to get more out there, but it never got to be more than a vague idea of pre-movie promotion (or even giving them to newbies coming out of Serenity to watch after and grow more attached and increase the chances of them telling their friends).

Well, I do something similar, with the Whedonverse Project I raise money from fans to get the DVDs of Whedon's shows into public libraries. Of course, the libraries actually request the DVDs, so its not quite the same as giving them out at random. However, if that makes me a total loonie, then so be it.

killinj | October 11, 16:25 CET

Any publicity is good publicity. Or nearly any publicity.

Flight attendents asking people to boycott Flightplan probably caused it's great box office showing, or at least help it in a fairly big way. It made national news.

If a guy had $3000 to spend on tickets... Fair enough. It might seem scary, but it's just about the only non-official-promotional media story I've seen about the movie.

If something like that broke nationally as a story, Serenity would soar from people wondering what the hell it's all about. Like Flightplan.

gossi | October 11, 16:34 CET

However, to be annoying and play devil's advocate, had this been someone doing the same thing for a different film (let's say 'Into the Blue' for argument's sake) I can't help but think that reaction to it here might not have been quite so positive in general.

Well, actually, I think my reaction would be the same: indifference. Sort of a "whatever floats his boat" reaction. Not the way I'd spend my money, but totally within his perogative, and far less disturbing than many other things he could do with it. Quite benign, actually.
True, if the movie were "Into the Blue" I might question his taste, but I wouldn't if it were "A History of Violence " or "Murderball" or many other movies (other than Serenity) out there...
And Serapion – I don't think of Serenity as anything more than a really fun action/sci-fi movie that continues a story of a world/people I happen to love. I don't think of it as the second coming or an incredibly intellectual film or even (*ducks*) one of the best films of the year. But I think being a really entertaining, well-told story has its own merits – ones you keep seeming to denigrate with the snarky "action movie with vibrator jokes"-type lines. You may or may not have liked the movie – that's fine. This certainly isn't a board that expects monolithic opinions. But many here (for obvious reasons) DID like it. And I don't think that makes us rabid cult followers of "a newfound messiah." Just fans of an entertaining movie.
Again, this guy buying extra tickets with his money is no more our business than if he were buying a $2500 suit or wasting it at a Vegas casino (or giving it to a charity, for that matter). I don't see what's so disturbing about it.
Even the amount is relatively negligable – a mere blip (not even) in Serenity's box office and an amount that lacks the power to make any real difference to poverty or world peace. Unlike, say, the millions that some celebrities might spend on a diamond ring or a jeweled toilet seat, if you want to go off on irresponsible spending... :-)

[ edited by acp on 2005-10-11 15:19 ]

acp | October 11, 17:16 CET

Gossi, how would one get that kind of national attention to something like that? Rhetorically speaking, of course.

electricspacegirl | October 11, 18:12 CET

electricspacegirl - for this story, you couldn't :)

However, if the Reavers union called for a boycott of Serenity...

Okay, I'll stop typing this Crap Joke(tm) right now.

gossi | October 11, 18:42 CET

acp:

..a jeweled toilet seat..

Ouch!

onesnailshort | October 11, 18:57 CET

Simon, I can certainly tone down how I express my opinions (i.e., be less than truthful about how repulsive I find this behavior), but I'm afraid the only way my opinions themselves could be toned down is if someone were to convince me to think differently.

I came here to post and read because I think Whedon is a good commercial writer whose work is interesting to follow and discuss, not because I think of him as a starving artist who can't get any attention for his work. His latest film is not a political cause who needs martyrs to lay down their savings accounts in its defense. The man is a highly paid artist of mainstream entertainment who probably makes more money a year than anyone else on this forum and who has no trouble finding work. And as far as I'm concerned, the products of the man's mind are going to be interesting whether or not he can get another Serenity movie made. Thus there isn't much of a cause to fight for here. Whedon will continue telling stories, and they will continue to be worth paying attention to. If he were in the miserable situation of a George Romero before "Land of the Dead" got greenlit I could perhaps understand the desperate tone of the fandom.

I suppose the main thing that sets me off about this behavior is that it strongly reminds me of the behavior Ernest Becker describes in his text "The Denial of Death." According to him, religious fanatics act illogically and destructively when their belief system is threatened, because to threaten their belief structure is to remind them of death, which sets off an emotional response. It seems to me that some of Joss Whedon's fans have such painful lives that they have turned to Whedon's fictional creations as a screen against the depression which would overwhelm them should the real world be faced full-on. Thus the desperation to prove Serenity a success, and to gain more sequels... As long as the Serenity story continues on, and as long as its cultural standing is not threatened by poor box office, the security blanket of Whedon's appealing universe is not yanked away and people whose lives are desperate and full of suffering suddenly act out in illogical ways and spend the content of their savings account in order to buy additional converts to the cause, or even possibly find a like-minded friend in a desperately lonely universe. The only problem is, it doesn't work in the end, and people who act out in this manner only find themselves in worse straits than before -- the same situation only minus $3,000.

[ edited by Serapion on 2005-10-11 17:06 ]

Serapion | October 11, 19:04 CET

a jeweled toilet seat

Ouch! That caught my attention. ( But one snailshort beat me to saying it.)

Joss Whedon is going to be just fine without these masturbatory displays of guerilla activism in the name of a $40 million dollar sci-fi kung fu movie."

"If the cause was truly so dire, and these Serenity stories were truly so important to be told, Whedon could get out the typewriter and write up the scripts and print them on the internet for free."

Ouch! Where am I?
Succatash | October 11, 06:22 CET

In case, Succatash, that you are implying that I'm not sufficiently appreciative of Mr. Whedon's works, and thus am in the wrong forum, I would like to clarify that I have seen every TV show and movie the guy has written, and read most of the comic books -- though not the licensed ones written by other people."

Serapion, I think Succatash was just commenting on the rather combative tone and language being used in your posts and that it was unusual for Whedonesque. Just my opinion, of course, but disagreements and opinions do have a tendency to be expressed in a bit less in-your-face way on this site than on other sites and Succatash may have just been jarred into confusion for a moment. ;-)

Congratulations SNT as finally being recognized on another site as "awesome." I'm sure the rest of the mods will be properly acknowledged by the world at large soon as well...though I seem to recall Simon getting some play here and there.

Oh yeah, and I'm with Ed Dantes and friends on this whole subject.

newcj | October 11, 19:05 CET

Ok Serapion that whole last paragraph was just weird. We aren't a f'in cult. I don't think its the fans who are taking it too seriously. More the people who feel the need to analyze them.

[ edited by eddy on 2005-10-11 17:16 ]

eddy | October 11, 19:15 CET

Yeah, but on the plus side, Ed, I'm "awesome." So it can't be all bad, can it? ;)

I sense sexual favors having been given....

a public performance done for public consumption, to prove himself as a superfan above all others for his superfan friends. Why else would someone stand around in public and hand out $3,000 worth of tickets in a parking lot full of people who arrived there intending to see other movies, and with ready cash to buy tickets to those other movies? We don't have to know this guy's name for him to quietly bask in the glow of having gloriously served his newfound messiah

Wow and once again the crux of your argument is jumping to all kinds of conclusions. You know absolutely nothing about this person other than that he bought a lot of tickets and gave them to strangers. And for all your righteous indignation (was some of that money stolen from you?) things still stand the same: it's none of your business. Just because you take a personal dislike to it doesn't mean that it somehow makes this 'your call' to make. And btw, 'new-found Messiah'? Blowing things up a tad, are we?

I hereby auto-agree with anything EdDantes says on the subject (hmmm - wonder if that was wise ;-))

Perfectly wise, GVH. Now let me go into a speech on how Serenity makes us all serve my Lord Beelzebub!! ;-)

I agree with electricspacegirl agreeing with GVH agreeing with EdDantes. So does my mom.

More recruits for the Dark Lord ;-)

had this been someone doing the same thing for a different film (let's say 'Into the Blue' for argument's sake) I can't help but think that reaction to it here might not have been quite so positive in general.

No but I'd still defend his right to do it. Still his money, his call, etc. I'd be scratching my head till it bled wondering why on earth THAT movie would get such passion out of someone but...

Flight attendents asking people to boycott Flightplan probably caused it's great box office showing, or at least help it in a fairly big way. It made national news.

You're joking! Didn't even hear that. Wow talk about an action backfiring...

However, if the Reavers union called for a boycott of Serenity...

You joke but you're on to something there. If Joss had put something really controversial in there other than the basic socio-political message it has, maybe people would've been picketing the movie's release. Now THAT would've gotten more mainstream people in seats, hehe. Joss, next time have Mal call the Pope a 'doo-doo head' or something!;-)

(Oh for any people from 'other sites' reading this, that was a joke, okay? Got it? Ah, never mind. I can see the new posts and articles now: "Browncoats are all anti-catholic!!")

EdDantes | October 11, 19:24 CET

Serapion, your first two paragraphs? Completely correct. Last paragraph? Incredibly judgemental. Incredibly labeling.

Not everybody invests in this fandom - or this site - for the same reasons. You shouldn't group and label people when you don't like their actions, certainly for something like this, I'd suggest.

[ edited by gossi on 2005-10-11 17:31 ]

gossi | October 11, 19:27 CET

Serapion, dude. People do this because they enjoy it. They get others to watch the movie to share the experience, to let others enjoy it. We want a sequel because it would be great to have one, not because our lives would would be unbearable without one. Psychological analyses of a person who you've never even spoken to extrapolated to a whole group? Weird...

GVH | October 11, 19:28 CET

I sense great anger for no reason. Where am I?

Succatash | October 11, 19:35 CET

Yoda, is that you?

gossi | October 11, 19:36 CET

Reminds one that their posts here could be used to extrapolate potentially unfair/inaccurate psych profiles. Man, the weird things people would think about me... ;)

zeitgeist | October 11, 19:37 CET

So I'm sitting here wondering did anyone call the Trek fans loonies when they tried to fund another Enterprise season themselves? Sure people said what they were doing was impossible. But did they question their moral beliefs and think they had fragile psyches for it?

eddy | October 11, 19:42 CET

zeitgeist, you are clearly a blue gloved control freak! ;)

gossi | October 11, 19:42 CET

gossi - I fully expect that the next time SNT and I post in the same thread that you will post 'Two by two, names of blue...' ;)

zeitgeist | October 11, 19:45 CET

Ok, only made it part way through this thread...not quite gettin' what the big uproar is about. His money, he felt the need to buy people movie tickets, not really seeing an issue. I think publicity is publicity - and that was more likely the goal than artificially inflating sales numbers (as with all of us, I'm ASSUMING on something I know nothing about).

If I'd have been at the theater and the guy was handing me free tickets, I'd say, "Thanks!" and go see myself a free movie...which would STILL cost me twenty-five bucks in popcorn and soda.

I'm noticing a definite trend in the threads on Serenity here as of late. I've stayed out of it til now, but there does seem to be some definite strong personal feelings attached to that flick. I know that people feel very involved and possessive - it's the fans that got this thing made afterall, So, I suppose people have the right to feel personally involved. I know emotions are high, as people feel disappointed the movie didn't kick more a$$ at the box office right away and everyone is trying to understand why, I'm just surprised to see emotions running so high, here, at Whedonesque.

And of course, due to zeitgeist - "Two by two, names of blue..." I probably have the entirely wrong reference in my head, because in my head Homer is saying "Leaves of three, leave it be. Leaves of four, have some more!" :)

[ edited by Grace on 2005-10-11 17:51 ]

Grace | October 11, 19:47 CET

I am, of course, going for the Firefly/blue-gloves ref.

zeitgeist | October 11, 19:53 CET

It is okay Succatash, you're at Whedonesque. We just have someone who has apparently decided that the only accurate way to express an opinion is to use inflammatory language and make unflattering judgements about...well...everyone, it seems. One poster who does not get the style of the site, does not the site change, especially if no one else indulges in the same way.

Grace, I don't see emotions running so high here because the movies didn't make money. Disappointment, yes, but not high emotipn. The high emotions seem to have come more from people who are getting upset with what has been reported fans have done to try to help the film. Most of which IMHO seems either pretty innocuous or nonspecific.

PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT: Unfortunately, because I am not big with the worship, I have to take away my whole-hearted support for EdDantes's posts.

(sigh) This is why I always have so much trouble with joining things. They keep getting corrupted. I mean, I was right there with you EdDantes, and then you had to go and ruin it by doing the whole religious thing. ...Worshipping indeed.

zeitgeist, since you turned blue the threads are certainly getting more colorful. :-)

newcj | October 11, 20:01 CET

zeitgeist, since you turned blue the threads are certainly getting more colorful. :-)

So you're saying there's some connection between zeitgeist being made a mod and high emotion?
zeitgeist is Glory?....

Sorry, dunno where that came from :)

Paul_Rocks | October 11, 20:04 CET

I'm slighty amused, slightly confused by this recent tension. People are getting stressed out. I have complete faith that whatever's going to happen with the Firefly/Serenity 'verse is meant to happen, and I'm just enjoying the wonderful movie we got. I'm still hyping it up to people a little bit, and hanging out with the 'coats, but I'm just not worried about it. Joss will do good in movies and whatever else he does. I'm excited about his next project. Oh, and him guesting on Veronica. We all need to take a deep breath and chill for a bit. Everything will work out in the end, the way things do.

ETA: I'm referring mostly to the tension on the other boards and some that's leaked in here. Whedonesque is still golden to me. I'm glad I'm here.

[ edited by electricspacegirl on 2005-10-11 18:09 ]

electricspacegirl | October 11, 20:05 CET

Ok, just read all the comments (I am happy with the consensus) and all I have to say is Go Ticket Guy!

SpookyRiverFan | October 11, 20:06 CET

That's how I feel to ESG - Of course, I'd want sequels but if we don't get them we still got a great two hours of storytelling and the main story from Firefly concluded.

But I agree with Newcj comments to Grace:

Grace, I don't see emotions running so high here because the movies didn't make money. Disappointment, yes, but not high emotipn. The high emotions seem to have come more from people who are getting upset with what has been reported fans have done to try to help the film. Most of which IMHO seems either pretty innocuous or nonspecific.

And I also think that this entire thread about some guy spending his own money got totally blown out of proportion by one person's views on this whole thing and everyone responding to that. It most likely would've just been something that most of us found amusing if not odd and then it quickly would have been forgotten.

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 20:12 CET

zeitgeist, since you turned blue the threads are certainly getting more colorful. :-)

Is that because I talk to much? :) Or am I inciting people?

zeitgeist is Glory?....

/me waits for ...is made of chocolate to resurface as well

zeitgeist | October 11, 20:17 CET

Wow! Z got all moddy then. Did anyone else see that! ;)
Weird!

Hey remember the good old days?
When you came to Whedonesque and people weren't cranky. We didn't start a thread with a fan's devotion and end up talking about Iraq. Or analyse one anothers phsyche or beliefs by how much time and energy they spent on anything Joss related. Remember when it was just us, and well...us.
Sigh...they were some good times.
Ah, now I have some favorite memories, as we all share on here.

But let me take you back to a time when life was....simpler. Like say, three months ago, when we just warmed ourselves by the monitor, basked in the love of Joss.

Come with me now...as we revise.
The Lurve Thread

Hmmmm, twas the same for me and I got married too.
Simon | August 07, 18:03 CET

I dated somebody for about 5 years from Buffy related matters. Oh yes.
gossi | August 07, 18:08 CET

Awww...that's so cool!

And not to mention all the new mates I've made through all things Joss (and am still making).

I shall be bring my note along on Wednesday if that's okay Gossi?
bubblecat | August 07, 18:20 CET

Sure, BC. I will pass it to cider on Friday at Birmingham.
gossi | August 07, 18:34 CET

Oh, do tell us of your Whe-Dating, Simon, gossi, etc. *sits cross-legged at their feet, all silly and festive, eager to hear happy/funny/inappropriate tales*
barest_smidgen | August 07, 18:40 CET

Yes, I'm with barest_smidgen on that. Cough up them there details please? It may be off topic but it's still some mighty fine Whedon loving, of a sort. *sits next to barest_smidgen, with pillow and blanky, ready for tales of ribaldry*
[ edit ] nixygirl | August 07, 18:44 CET

*smiles* Indeed, of the many things that I have to thank Joss and Whedonesque for, meeting my love, the incomparable barest_smidgen is the highest on that list. Several flights later (not to mention hundreds of hours of phone and literally thousands of emails and txt msgs) and planning our next visit thanks to Whe-Dating(tm) :) Would love to hear more about others' stories!
[ edited by zeitgeist on 2005-08-07 18:50 ]

zeitgeist | August 07, 18:45 CET

Ah...such good times. For those of you who are new here I highly reccomend the reading. Lot's of happy.

Also, is it true that Ben is....Glory???

nixygirl | October 11, 20:22 CET

Gossi, you wrote:

"Last paragraph? Incredibly judgemental. Incredibly labeling."

What I said was: "It seems to me that some of Joss Whedon's fans have such painful lives..."

See the word "some?" I didn't say the majority. But I don't think this guy is in the majority. It's extreme behavior.

I base the opinion above on a lifetime of observation of my own life and the lives of the people I have known. And in my own life and in the lives of people I have known, intense immersion in fantasy has been the result of pain in the real world. I can remember as a child when I couldn't sleep and cried all night because a comic book I loved was cancelled. The reason I cried was not because that comic book was so incredibly fulfilling and important, but because the rest of my life sucked and that piece of crap comic book was a shield against that suckage. I speak of this from experience, not as a smugly superior psychologist in a lab coat. I've seen posts on these boards wherein people describe themselves as crying with anger all the way home from the theater because of their feelings of betrayal about a certain death in this film. As with the $3,000 ticket man, this behavior strikes me as odd and destructive, so as a thinking person I try to figure out why people might be acting so strangely, rather than writing it off as "it's all cool, baby." There is a dark side to fandom, which I find extremely revealing about human nature in general, and thus worthy of examination and discussion.

[ edited by Simon on 2005-10-11 19:08 ]

Serapion | October 11, 20:33 CET

In fairness, I'd like to point out is FAR less nuts here than I thought it would be, with Serenity's release. I was convinced places like this would melt under the demands.

Mind you, you only have to look elsewhere on the t'interweb to see things going a bit south...

gossi | October 11, 20:34 CET

I see that I didn't participate in The Love Thread because I was down in the dumps about being loverless. But I can read it all now 'cause I'm happy. :)

electricspacegirl | October 11, 20:39 CET

There is a dark side to fandom, which I find extremely revealing about human nature in general, and thus worthy of examination and discussion.

True, but is this the place to do it?
Have you read the love thread? Not all fandom is about escaping your "pain". Some of it is about puppies and happiness.

Also,
I base the opinion above on a lifetime of observation of my own life and the lives of the people I have known.

Making sweeping generalisations on your opinion isn't necessarily productive, or helpful. Frankly, that's the kind of thing that creeps me out. Not saying I completely disagree with you on some of it tho, you certainly do have some valid points.

nixygirl | October 11, 20:47 CET

Hey, we all feel the care here.

Serapion, I understand that you care a lot about many things: Joss writings, and some man that you percieve have a serious problem that is hurting himself in some way.

And we all get maajor sappy over "the lurve tread".

We feel.
We care.
Live and let live.
A lot.

( Group hug, everyone)

onesnailshort | October 11, 20:47 CET

Yes, I do so love The Lurve Thread. Even if I'm a lonesome. It's little fire keeps me warm.
*hugz board back*

nixygirl | October 11, 20:49 CET

I buy some of what Serapion is saying- think back to the outcry about Tara's death in Buffy (which still affects me today, but certainly affected a great many people a lot more than it did I). A lot of people invest themselves very closely into these tales, and at times make take things to an extreme. With Serenity, I found what happened to be entirely predicable, and having said that, I still liked the movie a whole lot. What has bothered me is that so many people do not wish to admit the movie did not do as well as predicted. Joss had hoped for around $25 mil by the end of week 2 and they are coming up short-this does not bode well for a future sequel. But as Serapion has said, Joss is not going to hurt for work, and never has. It kills me that he is 10 years younger than I am, and was maybe 32 when Buffy hit the air- he will never again hurt for work. So, let's enjoy him (and hey, why did my MRQE post get pulled? I thought I was doing people a favor!).

Dana5140 | October 11, 20:53 CET

As with the $3,000 ticket man, this behavior strikes me as odd and destructive, so as a thinking person I try to figure out why people might be acting so strangely, rather than writing it off as "it's all cool, baby."

So when you cry its about "a shield against the suckage", but when other people feel as if their shield is being taken away, then they are odd and destructive? I ask not to be a jerk, but because that's what you seem to be saying and I'm genuinely interested to hear the answer.

nix - /grin re: The LoveThread(tm) and Ben/Glory

zeitgeist | October 11, 20:59 CET

By destructive, in this sense I refer to self-destructiveness. I literally could not sleep that night and was crying about the cancellation of a comic book about the adventures of Shogun Warrior action figures. If that behavior had continued on it would have been fairly destructive to my life.

It seems to me that if every other thing in someone's life that could use $3,000 applied to it is dwarfed in comparison to the success of an action movie, then that is de facto proof that said person's life is at the very least impoverished. I wonder if this person has kids, relatives, knows someone whose home has been trashed in New Orleans? The more insular, empty and deprived of social and societal connection a person's life is, the more likely it's going to be that they don't know of anyone or any cause in their community that needs that $3,000 more than the idea of proving a vague point at the box office of their local multiplex.

Serapion | October 11, 21:09 CET

Given it's an unnamed person, it's also possible it was somebody from a film studio with $3000 of expenses pulling a PR stunt. I'm sure the person from the paper just happened to be there by accident.

Remember those viral marketing clips? Universal swore to me they had nothing to do with them.

gossi | October 11, 21:13 CET

The more insular, empty and deprived of social and societal connection a person's life is, the more they get angry and judgemental towards someone they don't know, about something that doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Succatash | October 11, 21:19 CET

Remember those viral marketing clips? Universal swore to me they had nothing to do with them.

Yet, I have heard a whisper that it was actually their idea.
(Can't say sources might be lurking)

[ edited by nixygirl on 2005-10-11 19:21 ]

nixygirl | October 11, 21:20 CET

Hey, with all the tension that's been going on lately, might I suggest a solution? I vote for an official Whedonesque naptime in the afternoon!

...what...? It always worked in kindergarten...

RambleOn623 | October 11, 21:22 CET

It seems to me that if every other thing in someone's life that could use $3,000 applied to it is dwarfed in comparison to the success of an action movie, then that is de facto proof that said person's life is at the very least impoverished.

Not to beat a dead horse, but this again strikes me as a lot of assumptions. For some people, $3,000 isn't actually that much money. This person may (in fact, i think quite likely) has lots of superfluous cash if he's willing to do this. Assuming his life is impoverished because he spends it in this way, to me is no different than assuming someone's life is impoverished because they spend that much money on something equally as frivolous, which we all do all the time (maybe not that much, but amounts are relative - for some of us, spending $300 in a frivolous way would have the same impact). Everyone makes different choices about the way they spend money. I sometimes get up in arms about what seems to me to be really wasteful uses of money that could do real good in the world, but I've also come to realize that everyone makes their own choices for different reasons. Do I try to encourage people to be less self-centered and think, if they have money to spare, about giving it to social-change type causes? Absolutely. But I also try to refrain from judgement. We don't know how else this guy spends his extra cash - quite likely he supports nonprofits in addition to giving away free tickets. But it's not an earth-shatteringly large amount in any case. Not like he put $100,000 toward the movie, which i admit might disturb me somewhat.

I don't see it as giving charity to universal, or assuming joss needs our charity, or any of the assumptions that have been laid out here - just one slightly odd, quirky fan deciding on his own way to introduce more people to the film. Being a strange sort of Santa Claus to folks near the theater that day, perhaps. Wouldn't be my choice, but it's a pretty innocuous one.

Ok, that's my last post on the subject, since i can see we're going in circles. The judgement of spending is something that bothers me, though, in part because i know i sometimes do it, when i hear a friend talk about spending $500 on shoes, or something else that seems frivolous – only to later realize that we all have our own weaknesses.

[edited to fix typos]

[ edited by acp on 2005-10-11 19:25 ]

acp | October 11, 21:23 CET

"something that doesn't affect them in the slightest."

It affects my community that people in it are so confused that they don't recognze the value of money. If $3,000 doesn't mean much to this guy, he needs to read the newspaper and see what it means to single mothers living in his neighborhood who live in cars with their children. If he can't be bothered to do that, I can't be held responsible for pointing out the folly of his ignorant display. And that's what this is: a insulting extravagance acted out in front of the less fortunate. I wonder what the woman working the ticket counter could have done with $3,000. Maybe she could have quit her third job mopping the bathrooms at Arby's and spent a little more time with her kids that week.

Serapion | October 11, 21:35 CET

And that man...was Elton John.

Nancy Boy hair Gel | October 11, 21:40 CET

Serapion: So I assume you get equally up in arms about everyone who builds an unnecessary addition to their home, or eats in an extravgant restaurant, or buys an outfit they really don't need, or takes a vacation (which they obviously don't have to take)... The list could go on.
I agree that there are many ways that $3,000 could be better spent. My point is simply that no one spends all money perfectly, and it's just a teensy bit self-righteous to assume they should. I, too, wish there was less waste in the world, and that people were more conscious of the good that money can do. But people are also entitled to their own bits of frivolity. And while $3,000 is a lot, it's not going to solve endemic societal problems, or even turn one person's life around. I see much larger, more disturbing instances of waste and poorly spent money all around me, every day, so it seems odd to get up in arms about this one specific one.

acp | October 11, 21:52 CET

I'm naming this dead horse were beating hows about....Juan.

[ edited by Richard The 3rd on 2005-10-11 19:59 ]

Richard The 3rd | October 11, 21:55 CET

By destructive, in this sense I refer to self-destructiveness. I literally could not sleep that night and was crying about the cancellation of a comic book about the adventures of Shogun Warrior action figures.

Still jumping to conclusions if you assume your personal experience has to apply to other people. Especially when you know next to nothing about a person. People differ. Using entertainment for escapism is found in every single person. Some people take it too far, yes, but I would take care to actually know a person before you make all those judgement calls.

It sounds like your personal issues are what's getting to you so strongly. Again, nobody got hurt. You know nothing about this person and all that was done was that some people got free movie tickets. Hell, technically this guy (girl?) is a 'patron of the arts' which frankly is a time-honored tradition;-)

If he can't be bothered to do that, I can't be held responsible for pointing out the folly of his ignorant display.

If it's your choice to point something out, you are very much responsible. And again, you have no idea what this person spends on charity. And then still, it's not for you to tell other people what to do with their money. Most of the population buy DVDs, CDs, go out to dinner and to movies, buy a bigger TV. What is that on a year basis? According to you all of that is equally 'disgusting' then and I'd say your issue is with 99.99% of society and you can find far more deserving targets of your anger than this person. For example: CEOs who spend millions on bonuses on themselves while laying off workers, or have million dollar-birthday parties for their wives which they then deduct from taxes. Or defraud their own company to cash in, destroying people's life savings.

If you feel so strongly about miss-spending of money, perhaps you should go picket outside those people's offices instead of attacking someone who just bought some people movie tickets. Talk about odd priorities. At least this person did something nice for other people...

The more insular, empty and deprived of social and societal connection a person's life is, the more they get angry and judgemental towards someone they don't know, about something that doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Or, uh everybody ignore my post because Succatash actually said it better than I and with far fewer words...

EdDantes | October 11, 21:59 CET

Hey - does anyone want to join Ben and Glory and Angela and TamaraC and I for drinks?
This is just too much. I am a non-stop social critic in RL but I come here for fun and Joss worship - and not to speculate on the social or psychological makeup of an activity done by another fan. If I want that - I will go to other boards where such speculation is allowed and encouraged. But when it's done here - my little sacred space starts to feel a little less safe.

So - who wants what to drink? I am taking orders now. Although Ben and Glory are kind of hard to read - I just can't tell what they want.........

ruthless1 | October 11, 22:01 CET

Pass me the bottle - I need a drink right about now!

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 22:04 CET

Don't hog that booze, Flanatic. Pass it on, pass it on....

EdDantes | October 11, 22:07 CET

Me too. And I apologize for letting one poster's comments get to me. I'm done. Onto the drinking and reveling :-)

acp | October 11, 22:11 CET

wait you guys - I can't keep up!

What are we drinking?
I had too much whiskey about a month ago at a camping Irish music festival - and I ended up playing mandolin and singing Shady Grove (at the top of my lungs) with a band of merry pipers, fiddlers, guitars and one harmonica, til 3 am. So for me - being the "not often" drinker that I am - I'll just take a nice merlot. That way you all don't EVER have to hear my singing.
*is extremely relieved on your behalf*

ruthless1 | October 11, 22:14 CET

Wow. This is a really long thread over such a trivial (yet stange) thread...now I'm going to sit and regret not adding in the Love Thread or the Ben/Glory. I had so much fun reading them that I never thought to contribute!

MySerenity | October 11, 22:25 CET

I think we're all at an agree to disagree point here, so let's kick back and have some drinks and get silly. Bartender, I'll take a pint of the dark stuff ;)

zeitgeist | October 11, 22:28 CET

*Hic*, I too apologishe fer letting thish get to me. I luf you guysh, *snff*, you guysh are de besht....*hic*. If anyone'd effer bug ya.....I'd go *BAM* and *POW*. Cuz you guysh are the besht...I effer tell ya that?

I had so much fun reading them that I never thought to contribute!

Tha's okay. Haf a drink. Hey, did som'ne say 'singing'? Yay! 'Take my *hic*love, take my land, as long as you don't take my boooooze.....'

EdDantes | October 11, 22:28 CET

"But when it's done here - my little sacred space starts to feel a little less safe."

I'm sorry, I thought this was a place for discussion of the works of a secular writer, not a sacred one. I think I'll slowly back out the door before I get trussed up and served up as a sacrifice to the angry gods of Universal Studios.

Serapion | October 11, 22:29 CET

lmao! Ahhh, I so needed a good laugh today. Thank you Ed.

Angela | October 11, 22:31 CET

*imagines nixygirl waving us in with her arm, all Andrew-in-Storyteller-like for the "Come with me now, as we revisit The Lurve Thread" You're priceless, nix. :D Good times, indeed.

Hey you drunks! Are you all so lit that you completely missed the formerly blue (not to be confused with zeitgeist's capital-B Blue) electricspacegirl's pronouncement that she is now, in fact, happy?!? Filthy lushes. Didn't you notice that she seems to be hinting that she is no longer "loverless?" Pick yourselves up off the bar room floor, for crissakes, and raise your glass (or your keg) as the case may be, and toast our friend who seems to be of the bliss. Good on you, girl! Hey, who pinched my ass?

[ edited by barest_smidgen on 2005-10-11 20:35 ]

barest_smidgen | October 11, 22:33 CET

Pass that bottle over here, and let's hope it aint Absinthe. There's already enough angst on this thread. I'll have me some Mudder's Milk, hold the love thread in one arm and Ben/Glory under another and sing a little song.

Juan....the man they call Juan!

nixygirl | October 11, 22:36 CET

I hate to admit this, but I will: I read about the first 10 posts, rolled my eyes and scrolled on down to add my own comment.

The argument that the money could be better spent elsewhere holds no water, imo. The money I spent on candy yesterday could have been better spent elsewhere. The books I purchased could just as easily have been checked out from the library & I could have donated that money to the quake survivors instead.

However, I did buy candy and books and I'm just fine with that. I do charity work sometimes, cause I like it and it's the right thing to do. But, good lord, why is so much put under this negative microscope? And where is the Big Daddy God that tells us all where to spend our dough? What makes it ok or not ok? Should we all just forego seeing the movie and spend that couple of hours doing something socially worthwhile? (Ha! Let's get ten people together and try to define what's socially worthwhile, cause, that would be fun!) And who do we ask? Cause, frankly, I'm having a hard time imagining any sort of agreement being reached about anything. I'm sure there are no end of people who would love to tell me exactly where to spend my time and my money. Fortunately, I'm not much for other people deciding what is ok and not ok for me to do.

Anyone NOT Mother Theresa reincarnated doesn't really have room to talk. Must of us waste money, daily. All of us waste time on frivolities (and dear God, this is a sticky wicket... who gets to decide what's frivolous?). Who gets to decide how much is too much?

What's the deal? The guy wanted to do it, he did it. I would imagine it made him happy, made at least 250 people smile and brought a pleasant, isn't-humanity-cool, type vibe to the day. Personally, I'm a big ass fan of the unexpected, the quirky, the indivdual.

looking | October 11, 22:37 CET

Serapion - as you well know (I would hope), ruthless1 did not mean sacred as in religious/secular. They simply meant (at least the context informs me) that this was a place that was safe from that dark side of fandom, the bickering and infighting. As for the trussed up and served to the angry gods of Universal, we could use less verbiage designed to divide and inflame. Everyone else has seemingly agreed to disagree, but it seems you can't even do that without a parting shot. Please crank it down a notch, okay?

barest_smidgen - that was me :)

ESG - is there a story we should be hearing?

zeitgeist | October 11, 22:37 CET

A toast - I call for a toast!
Yeah electricspacegirl! Go girl go!!!
*does a wobbly happy dance that reflects too much alcohol consumption before lunch*

ruthless1 | October 11, 22:38 CET

Here's to ESG and her no longer "loverless" status!! And Serapion, stay awhile and have a drink with us! Ed, I think you better give me back that bottle now - is Rogue Slayer giving you a ride home later?!!

Firefly Flanatic | October 11, 22:39 CET

*imagines nixygirl waving us in with her arm, all Andrew-in-Storyteller-like for the "Come with me now, as we revisit The Lurve Thread" You're priceless, nix. :D Good times, indeed.

Ya got me in one there baby! Exactly what I was going for! ;)
It's a late night and I'm a little drunk, with all the alcky in the black. I didn't miss ESG's love, but failed to comment.

ESG, come tell us your own tales of ribaldry!
*gets pillow and blankie, sits down near barest, but not too close to the blue meanie Z and gets ready for sleepy byes story*

[ edited by nixygirl on 2005-10-11 20:45 ]

nixygirl | October 11, 22:44 CET

zeitgeist - we'll just fill Serapions parting shot with more liquor. heee! Thanks for the clarification but I didn't really think their comment was worth responding to.

Now please pass that bottle back this way. Ben (or is it Glory) is getting kind of pushy and morphing or something and I can't tell them apart anymore!

ruthless1 | October 11, 22:45 CET

Man totally missed the happy couple!! (Dunno why...*hic*) Tha's so great! You guys go! More drinks! Now it's a party!

Ed, I think you better give me back that bottle now - is Rogue Slayer giving you a ride home later?!!

Hey! Tha's my bottle! Getcher own. And as for RS, my own lovely salvation from being luvverless lacks internet right now, hehe. So what she don' know, don' hurt me! *gulp gulp gulp*

(*performs extremely awkward happy dance on the table that makes ruthless1 look like Gene Kelly*)

EdDantes | October 11, 22:46 CET

Sorry, double post....dunno WHAT's wrong wif me...

[ edited by EdDantes on 2005-10-11 20:47 ]

EdDantes | October 11, 22:46 CET

*nix passes out*
Night my lurvelies.

nixygirl | October 11, 22:47 CET

EdDantes - how do you know I don't already look like Gene Kelly anyway? Good guess man - good guess. I am his spittin' image. (NOT)

ruthless1 | October 11, 22:48 CET

Now I'm feeling guilty about anything remotely frivolous I spend my money on...better cancel my trip next week.

The man is a highly paid artist of mainstream entertainment who probably makes more money a year than anyone else on this forum and who has no trouble finding work. And as far as I'm concerned, the products of the man's mind are going to be interesting whether or not he can get another Serenity movie made. Thus there isn't much of a cause to fight for here. Whedon will continue telling stories, and they will continue to be worth paying attention to.

For me, the issue isn't so much that I feel like I really need to support Joss Whedon financially or he'll never make another movie again. It's more specifically that I love the Firefly and Serenity world and characters and would love to see more stories from *that* world and from *those* characters, and in order for that to happen, Serenity needs to have a certain amount of commercial success because it *is* a business, and it can not exist without that side of things in place. No, Joss is not a struggling artist and probably does not need my help to buy his groceries or make movies. But much as I love Joss' work and do want to support him (in the moral sense) in anything he does, my attempts to contribute to the business of Serenity are because I would specifically like to see Serenity continued.

And not because of some great emotional trauma or painfully impoverished life. My life has been (knock on wood) really smooth. I know I'm lucky that way. I just happen to like to escape into well-constructed fantasy worlds with interesting characters from time to time.

Personally, I do think what this guy did was a bit extreme. But the argument about how little perspective he has and how this indicates a frivolous use of money... if this guy had gone and spent $3000 on stereo equipment or some personal toy, nobody would have known or thought anything of it. Instead, he chose to spend $3000 on letting other people to do something enjoyable. No, it's not a charitable contribution, and not nearly as useful as contributing to helping out the poor or needy. But it seems to me to be a more altruistic way to waste your money than the way most of us waste ours...

Hmm lots of posts since I started typing this. Oops!

teenes | October 11, 22:53 CET

Alcohol? Now that I can agree with...I'll have a Rolling Rock and just get out of EdDantes' way! (That table looks a little wobbly!) :)

[ edited by Grace on 2005-10-11 20:55 ]

Grace | October 11, 22:54 CET

Wrote a long post while everybody else was posting the same thoughts...only shorter, soo I deleted it all.

Serapion, You seem intent on ignoring the point that people are making and instead choose the harshest way to interpret or misinterpret things. Doing that sure does get a lot of attention. :-D

Hey, I'll have a drink guys. I'm not much of a drinker, but my back has been killing me for days. (really) A little medicinal alchohol seems like just the thing. (honest) What are we drinking? I'm not fussy, I just want to have the right mixer. ;-)

...and yeah, what's up with electricspacegirl's love life? I saw that too barestsmidgen. c'mon ESG give!

Edited to point out that I am still looking for the same vicarious pleasure of hearing about good things happening to good people that I was back on the Lurve Thread. Yes, I'm still pitiful and will be for many years to come. ;-)

[ edited by newcj on 2005-10-11 20:57 ]

newcj |

October 11 2005