Firefly Reconsidered: Why Firefly Isn't "Hall of Fame" Great

[Zardnaar]

I agree I love it but it wasn't around long enough.

I've started valuing consistency over peaks and valleys so I would argue Stargate Atlantis and Farscape perhaps are the best sci Fi shows. 3-5 seasons call it a day.

Star Trek is just to inconsistent IMHO for example but I like DS9 a lot due to consistency. Stargate SG1 similar problem but more filler with occasional dud.

New shows might be able to do better over multiple seasons but if they're only 1/3rd or 1/2 the size it's not that impressive IMHO.

Would probably throw B5 in top 5 list the occasional episode was filler not to many duds though.

 

[ccs]

Yeah, but we have all the same documentaries, and others, on Chernobyl and Rome, but we don't say "HBO's Rome" or "HBO's Chernobyl". So that's not the causation. It must be something else.

It's not because we paid more for it, it's not to (consciously) differentiate between other versions/similar titles, it's because HBO's stuff was magnitudes better than most other shows on at the time. At the very least it left more of an impression. Thus we remember that it was HBO's Rome, etc.

 

[ccs]

I reject the original constraints. "Firefly" is definitely in my personal Hall of Fame, despite getting canceled after only filming 14 episodes. I don't care what plot lines might have been used if the show had lasted longer, I don't care whether the quality would have improved, stayed the same, or decreased over time had it had a full run - those 14 episodes for me are some of the most enjoyable sci-fi I've ever watched on television.

Johnathan

Agree.
Nor does Whedon having now been revealed to be some A-list **** impact my enjoyment of those 14 episodes. Oh look, another Hollywood type is actually an awful person. I'm shocked.

 

[Imaculata]

I find it a bit weird that people hate on Firefly based on the Inara/Reaver plot; a plot that never made it into the show.

Judge a show by what it is, not by what it could have been.

Almost every episode of Firefly is great. Great character moments, lots of humor, and plot twists. And thanks to Serenity, we also know how it would have ended. The only episode I dislike is Safe, and even that episode has its moments.

Modern shows can learn a thing or two about how to write a 1 hour episode and still have room for twists and turns, and character development. I'm looking at you Mandalorian!

As for Buffy, I recently rewatched the entire show with a friend, who had never seen it before. It still holds up really well, and she loved it. In my opinion, over all its seasons, it has only a few duds. Almost the entire first season is the show trying to find its voice, but the things that would end up making it such a great show, are already there.

In my opinion, the worst episodes are: Beer Bad, Where the wild things are, Beauty and the Beasts, I Robot You Jane. Not a whole lot, considering how many seasons there are.

 

[Maxperson]

I find it a bit weird that people hate on Firefly based on the Inara/Reaver plot; a plot that never made it into the show.

Wow. Thanks. I've been racking my brains trying to figure out how I could have forgotten it.

 

[Imaculata]

Wow. Thanks. I've been racking my brains trying to figure out how I could have forgotten it.

It is probably one of many plots that never made it into the show... like with every tv show.

Such a strange criticism: to critique a show for a bad plot line that got dropped.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It is probably one of many plots that never made it into the show... like with every tv show.

Such a strange criticism: to critique a show for a bad plot line that got dropped.

It‘s not a dropped plot line.
it‘s where the plot was going, but they didn’t get to do it because it was cancelled.

 

[Imaculata]

It‘s not a dropped plot line.
it‘s where the plot was going, but they didn’t get to do it because it was cancelled.

Perhaps. Pure speculation at this point. It's not in the show, so it is silly to critique the show for it.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Perhaps. Pure speculation at this point. It's not in the show, so it is silly to critique the show for it.

No. Speculation would be, "I think they might have done a musical episode, but with puppets. Kinda like Buffy AND Angel."

When the writer/producer Tim Minnear says that he was recruited by Whedon with the pitch for that episode, and you see that the structure of the episodes was built to foreshadow that episode, it's not just speculation. If Buffy had been cancelled one episode before Angel was 'revealed' as a vampire (um... spoiler?) would that have been speculation? Or both the planned outcome of the choices they were making, and, you know, obvious?

Is it possible that they might have changed direction? Sure. But there has never been any indication that they were going to.

As for why it matters to the critique, or my critique- the relationship dynamic between Inara and Mal is the worst aspect of the show to begin with. The idea that the resolution of Mal's inability to resolve his Madonna/Whore complex is to have Inara gangraped makes it go from slightly uncomfortable to grotesque. Again, IMO, YMMV.

The reason I didn't want to go to deep into this in the OP is that Firefly is fine. It's a decent show. I didn't write the OP to pile on to the show. I truly love Buffy and Angel. I liked Firefly and Dollhouse. But the things that, for me, make Firefly a standout (specifically- an absolutely stellar cast) do not overcome the issues that I have with it that become more glaring over time and that I cannot overlook. I barely made it through re-watching the last time, and that was before the Whedon mess came out.

If you love the show like Homer Simpsons loves donuts- unreservedly and with pink frosting, then such is your considered choice and I have no wish to disturb it.


EDIT- I wanted to make a slight caveat. When I say that the Inara/Mal dynamic is the worst aspect, I mean the Mal aspect. And I also think that the borrowing of Lost Cause mythology is arguably worse, for me. It may not bother other people who don't notice it or don't care.

 

[Janx]

I'm not sure how the idea of "filler" works for non-serialized shows.

A serialized show has "filler" when the main serialized plot is shorter than the season, and they have to fill time. An episodic show has no plot to have gapes that need filling. An episodic show is effectively all filler.

Bottle episodes, clip shows. TNG had a few of them, and they're noted in the various episode guides. They happened because being forced to film 24 episodes meant stretching budgets. So they'd make a filler episode on the cheap so they'd have more money for other episodes.

Stargate SG-1 was probably one of the last shows to do clip shows (in my viewings), but they at least wrote it into a gag of some sorts.