I was reading some blogs the other day, and I don't know what to make of Firefly when comparing it with other shows. My brother tells me that it's his favorite show (he has really watched that much tv), but I keep thinking how a 14-episode show could be that good. I want to go into my psychology and see if I make any sense.
Every show has good episodes and bad episodes. The good shows will usually have more good than bad, and the bad shows will usually have more bad than good. Most good shows will continue for several season assuming that the ratings are reasonable. As the show progresses, the viewers are able to see character development, and story development which is part of what makes a show overall, great (serialized drama).
For me, Firefly is an enigma I can’t really wrap my head around it. There are some episodes that are absolutely amazing (Out of Gas, Objects in Space) while others (The Train Job) weren’t so great. Almost all the episodes were of high quality and the cast is wonderful. I thought whoever did the casting did an awesome job especially without any big names. The characters had personalities and the dialogue was always spot-on. The over-arching mythology was intriguing though it was not delved into that much. The stand-alone episodes had that western feel along with scifi elements that made the show so fun to watch.
That being said, it was only a half-season. There were many unresolved storylines and lots of missing background for Shepard and Inara. There was only some character development surrounding Mal, Simon, and River. No one is at fault other than Fox which refused to renew a show with such a rabid fanbase.
So now I’m totally confused. The concept of the show is great, the characters are great, the music is great, the visual effects are great, but with only 14 episodes, where do I place this show among my favorites? This also relates to another show that is one of my favorites: Alias. I consider the first two seasons of Alias the best consecutive seasons of any show. While the later seasons tanked, season one and two are still unbelievably good enough to raise the stock of the entire show.
I certainly enjoy watching the single season of Firefly, but it doesn’t contain number of good episodes that The X-Files has even though the one season of Firefly is comparable to any season of XF. When I compare the show to Farscape, I immediately think Firefly is better. I consider Farscape overrated with the bad acting and soap-opera moments. However, Farscape does have a fairly fleshed out (and compelling) storyline though it only has 4 seasons and IMO better wrap-up with the Peacekeeper Wars miniseries than the Serenity movie.
I’m in deep water now. Based on the later comparison, do shows with big story arcs really matter than much to me? I wouldn’t stop watching NCIS just to watch a serialized show. I’m quite fine with crime procedurals or any procedural for that matter with all or most standalone episodes, so what is my deal with Firefly. Do I need more episodes for a show to be considered great? Is it just my disappointment there were no more seasons?
I’ll assume no one will really read my entire ramblings, but I think I may be closer to why I don’t put Firefly near the top of my favorite/best shows. It is my underlying frustration that there are no more episodes of the show than the spare number we have. The show could have been so much greater. Please comment and slap me back into the realm of logic.
14 comments:
Firefly was brilliant but it had low ratings. Or something. In any case, it did win an Emmy for best visual effects. Unheard of for an already canceled television show.
I have watched the fourteen episodes too many times to count. Largely from bringing it to someone's house to show someone new.
Does the book depend on how much time it takes to read it? If so, War and Peace is truely a great book, but I will not read it simply because it is BIG but for the history and cultural info. Same goes for movies. Firefly is my favorite TV series because of the qualities you brought up. If the humanoid robots at Faux had any real emotions or qualities other than massive stupitity, Firefly would still be showing its wonderful story to Browncoats like me.
You know, there were only ever twelve episodes made of Fawlty Towers.
Firefly is so good that even cancelled outshines all other shows ever made... probably an overstatement but you get the point ^^;
(you should see battlestar galactica for a truly great show)
I've always thought that what matters most for a show (or movie, book, or game) is its universe. This includes, story arcs, characters, histories, and backstories. It's sort of an all-encompassing term. So, if we go by this definition of good (a fleshed-out, imaginative universe), Firefly can hold its own against massive shows that have been running for years. The fact that the characters were already very well thought out right in the pilot, there was a huge variety of weapons, planets, starships, and buildings, and characters had genuinely intriguing backstories, makes up for the lack of overarching storylines.
My god, that's the worst run-on I've ever written.
Fox has a terrific habit of canceling award-winning shows, like The Ben Stiller Show, Arrested Development, and Firefly. Let's not forget Undeclared and the Lazarus of all TV shows, Family Guy.
Fox recently aired a "pilot"/made-for-tv-movie called Virtuality, from the creator of Battlestar Galactica. In true Fox fashion, they aired it on a Friday night with almost no promo. The pilot was great but may never be picked up as a full series. Fox would rather play it safe and order an entire season America's Next Top Hillbilly than a "heady" scifi series.
Farscape had bad acting? What are you, an idjit?
Can a one season TV show be considered great?
Yes, yes it can.
Fox canceled Titus too, screw those guys.
Don't forget that the trainjob was a rushed script that fox made whedon write because they didn't want to open the series with the 2 hour opener that whedon wanted. they wanted more "Action"
14 episodes is too short to get to the point where they add too many fillers because they want it stretched artificially for more episodes. Which in turn makes a lot of series bad.
It was too short to make a whole lot of mistakes, and it was too short to flounder.
Flounder, as in manage to make all the mistakes of shitty series, like shitty guest appearances, cheesy filler episodes, and shitty this and cheesy that.
Yes they had to write The Train Job over a weekend. And since it would replace the pilot they still had to introduce the big ensemble cast(9 major characters) into about 45 minutes of airtime + all the action fox wanted.
The 2 hours pilot did a marvelous job of presenting each character but it was unfortunatly broadcast at the END of the season. No wonder many people didn't "get" the show and dismissed it.
I can't speak for everyone's experience, but when I first came across Firefly on-air, the stupid network decided to show it out of order, and place the pilot episode last in that order. For such a brilliant show, it seemed like it was intentionally sabotaged or bungled beyond any reasonable amount of ineptitude. I'm still sad that this show didn't get the run it should have.
I concur with all that have gone before. Firefly was awesome. Out of Gas was the best episode and from all I hear Fox are idiots.
One advantage I have found is that I am able to borrow the Season 1 DVDs and Serenity from my buddy that has them and with them I am able to watch a complete story (don't get me wrong, it is a short story) but an excellent story no less.
D!