Well, yes. But, given the story and the structure, I'm really not sure he could have got much more screen time without it seeming unecessary. Since the film more or less had the pace spot on, I'm not sure you can complain about Book from any position other than the fan's. (Cue the exchange we had last night.)
And can I just say that seeing Mal as (reputedly) originally intended was a pleasure?
Wash did, indeed, get screwed. And in a nasty, over-too-quickly, no time for grieving way. Great way to kill him off, but I'll miss him, he was probably my favourite character, and woefully underused except in War Stories.
I have only one change I'd make to the film, but I'll post that on my own journal tonight.
Fillion told us that Joss has said he finds it hard to imagine another film without Wash or Book. The panted one added that Joss is "a clever bastard", so we shouldn't discount the possibility.
On the film vs. tv front, thinning the cast helps him out a bit, though. I really do wonder how much the film will be comprehensible to people who haven't seen Firefly.
One thing I loved: the number of scenes where there were three or four different things going on at once. Example: when Inara calls Mal. We have the awkwardness of the Inara/Mal thing; the amusement of the rest of the crew watching; and the uneasy knowledge that Inara basically has a gun to her head. Very nicely done.
Do we think they changed the River/Simon escape story too much? Or if they didn't change it, Simon knew a lot more than he was letting on ...
There were a number of trademark Joss scenes - Jayne and oe continuing the conversation about the grenades whilst Mal moved on, for example - that really set the film up as intelligent and multi-layered. This may or may not appeal to the mainstream. On the surface, it's a typical sci-fi romp. Now, people may be all Fox-like when it turns out to be different, or be thankful that here, finally, is a film with intelligence. I'm not sure which it's going to be yet. A lot will depend, I think, on the initial reviews in October (which is why this slow building up of expectation and credibility has been so very clever a marketing strategy). I'm not as convinced as Fillion seemed to be that the film is a slam-dunk. I think it could be, even though it's not perfect; I think it could just as easily sink without trace
( ... )
Comments 127
Well, yes. But, given the story and the structure, I'm really not sure he could have got much more screen time without it seeming unecessary. Since the film more or less had the pace spot on, I'm not sure you can complain about Book from any position other than the fan's. (Cue the exchange we had last night.)
And can I just say that seeing Mal as (reputedly) originally intended was a pleasure?
Reply
In a towel with bedhair?
Reply
His hair was longer than in the show. OMGTHEYISCHANGINGOURSHOWFORTHEMASSIESS!!!1!
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I mean I thought it was upsetting enough watching Serenity get smashed up like that..
Reply
Reply
I have only one change I'd make to the film, but I'll post that on my own journal tonight.
Reply
Fillion told us that Joss has said he finds it hard to imagine another film without Wash or Book. The panted one added that Joss is "a clever bastard", so we shouldn't discount the possibility.
Hmm.
Reply
One thing I loved: the number of scenes where there were three or four different things going on at once. Example: when Inara calls Mal. We have the awkwardness of the Inara/Mal thing; the amusement of the rest of the crew watching; and the uneasy knowledge that Inara basically has a gun to her head. Very nicely done.
Do we think they changed the River/Simon escape story too much? Or if they didn't change it, Simon knew a lot more than he was letting on ...
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
From the Joss commentary on Chosen (which is ataggeringly germane toSerenity): "of course once you die in the Whedon verse you get more air time."
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment