Serenity DVD [SPOILERS]

[Ranger REG]

Well, whatever people on the internet say about the SW prequels, the last one made like 800 million dollars worldwide.

Meh. It's one of those things that makes you say, "Hmm?" along with the popularity of David Hasselhoff in Germany, the popularity of pay-2-play MMORPGs, and iPods.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

along with the supposed popularity of David Hasselhoff in Germany, the popularity of pay-2-play MMORPGs, and iPods.

Fixed that for you.
The only time he was somewhat popular was when he starred in Knight Rider and Baywatch, I think. He had a concert (at least he sung) during the events of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which is certainly remembered (especially since there exist pictures and videos of that events). Somehow it made him convinced that he is a great star here, but I know no people who actually care for him these days.
(Though I admit, at that time and age, I was a great fan of Knight Rider - I still am, in the nostalgic fanboy way - and then I enjoyed his song "Looking for Freedom", but mostly because of the connection to KITT, err Knight Rider.)

Oh, and for the record: I never wore and probably never will wear Lederhosen and I don't really like Sauerkraut, either.

 

[Vigilance]

Meh. It's one of those things that makes you say, "Hmm?" along with the popularity of David Hasselhoff in Germany, the popularity of pay-2-play MMORPGs, and iPods.

Heh. It doesn't make me say "hmm" at all. It makes me say "taste is not universal".

You might dislike all those things. But plenty of people obviously DO, since they all have been really successful.

But when you say "why would movie companies consider prequels/reimaginings" when we have Batman Begins (very successful) and the SW prequels (all very successful), well, the question sort of answers itself.

People have shown their willingness to support these kinds of movies.

 

[Ranger REG]

Fixed that for you.
(Though I admit, at that time and age, I was a great fan of Knight Rider - I still am, in the nostalgic fanboy way - and then I enjoyed his song "Looking for Freedom", but mostly because of the connection to KITT, err Knight Rider.)

Oh, I'm a fan of Knight Rider and David as the star of that show, but never a fan of his singing.

But of the 800 millions that went to see RoTS how many of them actually enjoyed it? Or are almost all of them simply Star Wars label fans. George Lucas could have finished the film in low budget with low-tech special effects and fans would still come to see it.

Anyhoo... my gripe is about the prequels trend in Hollywood. If Serenity means to be Episode 3, can't Joss just aim for Episode 4?

 

[ender_wiggin]

Taking this from a different angle, I found myself wondering what the target age of the movie was halfway through it. The jokes seemed awfully pubescent. A little low for me? But I see people than me enjoying this movie. Or am I born of a generation jaded by these things (I'm in the 18-24 category)? Or is it the elusive age category that I'm in?

I've seen a few episodes of Buffy previously, and noted its typically lacking television dialogue. What disappointed me was that the construction of Serenity's dialogue did not much improve over what I've previously seen of Whedon's work. But this I can forgive -- the movie is obviously meant to be taken as light. Dialogue that sounds hopeless unrealistic doesn't matter.

Two things really bothered me though -- both typical of Whedon, imho. The first was the presence of a female do-it-all. She's attractive, she's innocent, and she kicks much more ass than a girl of 100 pounds can viably kick. It's a little cliche. I was hoping could do something more original of his own work.

The second, which bothered me even more, was the presence of a completely unnecessary romance. It's 2006. Thus, unless your target audience is 12-15, you do not need a romantic side plot. Imho, if you are to include such a plot, you have to give it more weight. Does it sell the movie? Sure. Is it sh*tty? Definately. But writing things into the plot to make more money does not earn my respect.

Now, on to things that were good. Whatever budget this movie recieved was probably enough to buy some serious digital editing capabilities. Some of the space shots were amazing. I guess I'm a sucker for well done CGI.

And of course, the transitioning was good. Take the first scene -- I was truly impressed with the pacing. Keep the audience in one mindset long enough to do what you need to do (first the setting was introduced, then 2 major characters), but before we're comfortable, we're thrust out, onto something new. Clever as hell.

All in all, I give it a 70, which, in my scale, is a heavily flawed, predictable, but enjoyable flick.

 

[Dagger75]

The second, which bothered me even more, was the presence of a completely unnecessary romance. It's 2006. Thus, unless your target audience is 12-15, you do not need a romantic side plot. Imho, if you are to include such a plot, you have to give it more weight. Does it sell the movie? Sure. Is it sh*tty? Definately. But writing things into the plot to make more money does not earn my respect.

Have you even seen the show before the movie?? The Mal and Inara sub plot was in the show, the same with the Simon and Kaylee. Both were resolved at the end of the movie. Joss gave us closure on those plot threads.

 

[Roudi]

Where did you see closure between Mal and Inara? One of the things I like about the series is that Joss never seems to let that one go anywhere. It's constant, consistent tension and intrigue!

 

[Ranger REG]

Two things really bothered me though -- both typical of Whedon, imho. The first was the presence of a female do-it-all. She's attractive, she's innocent, and she kicks much more ass than a girl of 100 pounds can viably kick. It's a little cliche. I was hoping could do something more original of his own work.

You're not suggesting a male know-it-all. That has been overdone in Hollywood. The sheer number dwarfs the number of leading female heroes of the similar caliber ... counting River, Buffy, and Xena.

The second, which bothered me even more, was the presence of a completely unnecessary romance. It's 2006. Thus, unless your target audience is 12-15, you do not need a romantic side plot. Imho, if you are to include such a plot, you have to give it more weight. Does it sell the movie? Sure. Is it sh*tty? Definately. But writing things into the plot to make more money does not earn my respect.

If you're referring to the Mal-Inara dynamics, I don't know where that relationship is going. But it's more interesting when they keep fighting that I do not want to see them ending up together soon.

 

[Welverin]

Have you even seen the show before the movie??

Do you really need to ask?

But of the 800 millions that went to see RoTS how many of them actually enjoyed it? Or are almost all of them simply Star Wars label fans. George Lucas could have finished the film in low budget with low-tech special effects and fans would still come to see it.

You have a lot of trouble acknowledging that your opions are the god given truth and accepting not everyone shares you're opions don't you?

 

[heirodule]

HAny idiot can shoot a gun and with luck hit a target, but a bow requires much practice and innate skill to use well. Inara is not a thug. She is not going to use a brute force weapon. She's going to use a weapon that suits her, rather than a weapon that necessarily might work better.

There should have been a sceene where Zoe reams her out for trying to roleplay instead of being effective

It reminds me of an old 1e RPGA classic mod, where the pregen wizard roleplay notes said he was afraid of fire and wouldn't use fire spells. OK. fine. Then we open the door to the room filled with 20 wights who won't come out of the room. We shut the door, and I said, my PC conquers his fear as of now, and memorized fireball.