# Disney Plus could be rebooting Firefly



## Aeson (Dec 16, 2020)

Disney Plus Reportedly Rebooting Joss Whedon's Firefly
					

Joss Whedon still hasn't washed off the stench that Justice League left on his career, and if anything, it could mark the beginning of a downward spiral following Ray Fisher's accusations of misconduct. Once the Cyborg star went public with his claims and invited legal action from Whedon's...




					wegotthiscovered.com
				





Is this a good idea?


----------



## Aeson (Dec 16, 2020)

Give me a good one for no.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 16, 2020)

They are terribly unlikely to get anything like the chemistry of the original, which was its real selling point.  So, I don't expect this to turn out well.


----------



## aco175 (Dec 16, 2020)

There are no more original stories in Hollywood (Disney), but I would like to have something like the original.


----------



## Aeson (Dec 16, 2020)

I would like to see that universe expanded. I think it would be a mistake to start over. Once River's past, and how the Reavers came to be were revealed, it would be hard to put them back in the box. It would have to pick up after Serenity, and deal with the aftermath.


----------



## Khelon Testudo (Dec 16, 2020)

Yeah... nah.
It's time has come and gone. 

Is there room for another sf series about a group of witty nomadic mercenary ne'er-do-wells and their ship? Sure! But not this one. Firefly is done.


----------



## Benjamin Olson (Dec 16, 2020)

Please do not take this in any way as a judgment of Firefly, but to the eyes of corporate suits it has to just look like off-brand Star Wars (and honestly, I love it, but it really is in most ways that matter). I don't see how Disney ends up making it.

They own the leading brand franchise, so I don't see how major investment in the off-brand make sense to media conglomerate brains. If Star Wars shows are doing well and they receive a Firefly pitch then it will probably become a Star Wars show about a crew of lovable misfits trucking around between planets on a funky and cobbled together but somehow exceptionally high performance ship, on the run from authorities and having various episodic Sci-Fi adventures. A lot of Star Wars is like that, and that is where Joss Whedon got the damned idea in the first place. He developed it more than any Star Wars media ever did, and is a strong writer in a way George Lucas certainly never was with a level of authorial control that most the non-Lucases helming Star Wars media have not had, but core concept-wise Firefly is the "Millennium Falcon in the old west" and for those not invested in the Firefly universe's lore the same stories mostly fit the galaxy far far away.

If Star Wars shows do poorly and they get a Firefly pitch then Disney executives will just assume that audiences have lost interest in all things Star Wars like and not make it for that reason. because that is how megacorporate media conglomerate brains think.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Dec 16, 2020)

As much as I like Nathan Fillion, even he could not make Firefly watchable for me, so maybe a better version from Disney would be a good thing. Plus it would give those weird Star Wars haters some sci-fi to watch on Disney+.


----------



## Ulfgeir (Dec 16, 2020)

Depends on how it is done.

I would have loved seeing more of the original cast do more seasons. They had wonderful chemistry, and so much to explore. Remake with the same characters, probably not a good idea. Of course they could do some kind of series that take place between the tv-series and the film. That would work if handled well. Or go with what happens after the film. 

Otherwise, they probably need to do new orignial characters , that do something similar. Might be set at the same time as the others, and let the original characters just be peripherially present. As in you hear rumours of what they have done, or they show up for a scene  in the background etc.


----------



## ccs (Dec 16, 2020)

I'm going to go with NO, it's not a good idea.
But things not being a good idea isn't often a deterrent in the entertainment industry....


----------



## Dioltach (Dec 16, 2020)

Best to steer clear from the original crew and their story. It's not like the Battlestar Galactica reboot, which took a good idea that was poorly executed and made it much, much better - even decades later, Firefly still has a solid fanbase who feel very strongly about the show and the characters. But I think there's plenty of the 'Verse left to explore: before or during the Unification War, during the same timeframe as the original series, after the movie. Loads of locations and strong characters. Loads of stories waiting to be told.


----------



## Zardnaar (Dec 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> They are terribly unlikely to get anything like the chemistry of the original, which was its real selling point.  So, I don't expect this to turn out well.




 This. 

 But it was that specific cast that made the show imho.

  More stories in that universe maybe. Recasting gonna be hard.


----------



## BrokenTwin (Dec 16, 2020)

I loved Firefly, but I'm sick of watching Disney dredge up the corpses of old stories to soullessly wring them for profit. Firefly was worth it because of its heart (the humanity and chemistry between the main cast). The setting was set dressing for us to watch the family of Serenity.
I don't want to see Disney's generic spit shined version. Although to be fair, they might actually correct the blatant issue the series had of the massive lack of Asian actors both in the background and the extended cast.
But ultimately, I'm one person, and Disney making another version of Firefly isn't going to affect my fond memories of the original unless I let them.


----------



## TwoSix (Dec 16, 2020)

I mean...Disney is doing a ton of new shows in the Star Wars universe; a show about a mismatched group of ex-Rebellion avoiding the Empire/First Order in the Outer Rim couldn't work?


----------



## Umbran (Dec 16, 2020)

TwoSix said:


> I mean...Disney is doing a ton of new shows in the Star Wars universe; a show about a mismatched group of ex-Rebellion avoiding the Empire/First Order in the Outer Rim couldn't work?




Nobody is saying the premise doesn't work.  We are saying that the premise isn't what led us to love Firefly in the first place.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Dec 16, 2020)

Aeson said:


> Is this a good idea?




No.

Let me explain why, in multiple parts.

1. The original Firefly is basically "the Lost Cause" set to film. Once you see it as neo-Confederacy propaganda, unwitting or not, it's hard to unsee. It's basically a "space western" that is retelling the story of Confederate soldiers in the western frontier.

2. The dynamics of some of the show, especially between Malcolm and Inara (the Madonna/Harlot complex, etc.) and some of the River plot did not age well.

3. Some of Whedon's ideas for the future ... no, thank you.


Spoiler: Warning, link to discussion of Inara plotline that is disturbing



Source: Did Joss Whedon Nearly Have a Bleak Rape Plot on Firefly?



I realize what I posted is pretty grim. And I say this is someone who genuinely likes Joss Whedon's work! And Firefly! But I don't need it rebooted. Any reboot will never recapture the magic of the original, which was largely the writing and the chemistry of the cast. 

For those fans of Firefly- do you know how we got it? Because someone did something original. And every reboot is something that is not original.


----------



## TwoSix (Dec 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Nobody is saying the premise doesn't work.  We are saying that the premise isn't what led us to love Firefly in the first place.



Oh, I know.  Since they can't reboot the cast, the only real reason to do a reboot is to maintain the general premise and the fictional universe, and I think the premise is more intriguing than the fictional universe.  So why not just use the premise in the fictional universe they're already heavily invested in?

To be clear, I don't think this is a good idea.  Great shows benefit from a particular alchemy between cast, crew, and writers at a particular moment in time, and it's not something that can just be recreated years later.  (Look at Arrested Development!)


----------



## Umbran (Dec 16, 2020)

TwoSix said:


> So why not just use the premise in the fictional universe they're already heavily invested in?




Because telling people it is a reboot of Firefly, but then setting it in the Star Wars Universe would seriously cheese fans off?  If you wanted to do this, you'd not speak of it in terms of directly ripping off another show, even if you owned that other show.


----------



## TwoSix (Dec 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Because telling people it is a reboot of Firefly, but then setting it in the Star Wars Universe would seriously cheese fans off?  If you wanted to do this, you'd not speak of it in terms of directly ripping off another show, even if you owned that other show.



That's why they shouldn't do a reboot of Firefly!  To clarify, I don't see why Disney would do a reboot of an IP when they're already investing heavily in a more valuable IP that has a lot of conceptual overlap.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 16, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> For those fans of Firefly- do you know how we got it? Because someone did something original. And every reboot is something that is not original.




So, there a point where that doesn't really hold, though.  Taken to its logical conclusion, that means that every episode beyond the first in a series is something that's "not original".  That is absurd, which means that it actually matters where you put the line between, "Continue to explore this premise," and, "Go try something new."

It seems to me to be fair to say that the original Firefly premise wasn't really explored much, such that there's a lot of "new" territory remaining in it, such that a lot of original material is possible in a reboot.

There's reasons to not do more Firefly.  Lack of original story space isn't one of them.


----------



## billd91 (Dec 16, 2020)

Snarf Zagyg said:


> 1. The original Firefly is basically "the Lost Cause" set to film. Once you see it as neo-Confederacy propaganda, unwitting or not, it's hard to unsee. It's basically a "space western" that is retelling the story of Confederate soldiers in the western frontier.



There are similarities. But they're largely superficial since the Browncoats weren't fighting for a society based on exploitation of a whole race of people. I'm not necessarily going to knock someone being critical of the show because they found those similarities off-putting. But this is one of the few environments where a heavily western-style show and storytelling can work without actually being tainted by either slavery or colonialist warring against indigenous cultures.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Dec 16, 2020)

Firefly couldn't get viewers when it was new.  The whole reason it was cancelled.  It didn't become really popular until after it was cancelled, and thus many fans became fans because suddenly here was a show not treated right by the execs, and it's easy to root for the underdog.  Don't get me wrong, I like the show, but it's gonna have some serious challenges to do a reboot.  Then you've got all the reasons already mentioned about why this is a bad idea.  People will be expecting the original, comparing it to the original like it or not, and they will be disappointed.


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Dec 16, 2020)

billd91 said:


> There are similarities. But they're largely superficial since the Browncoats weren't fighting for a society based on exploitation of a whole race of people.




Whedon created the series after reading _The Killer Angels. _I'd say that there are more than similarities. 

It's never really stated what the Browncoats were fighting for, but yes, I would have been surprised if Joss had an episode where it was revealed that Mal was really a plantation slaver pining for the old days.

Again, I like Firefly, but it's definitely uncomfortable in parts.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 16, 2020)

Umbran said:


> They are terribly unlikely to get anything like the chemistry of the original, which was its real selling point.  So, I don't expect this to turn out well.



Agreed. It was a thing of its time with a cast that worked incredibly well together, which is a hallmark of Wedon series. It's why he so frequently works with the same actor pool, over and over again. Capturing that again is very unlikely.

If someone wants to play in the same sandbox, without trying to directly recreate magic since past, is a completely different thing.


----------



## Sacrosanct (Dec 16, 2020)

And you can forget about the original cast getting together, even for cameos.  Some of them may just not do it for one reason or another, and you can believe Adam Baldwin won't be allowed anywhere near it (just imagine the backlash from fans if he did).


----------



## MGibster (Dec 16, 2020)

_Star Trek _was cancelled in 1969 and we got _Star Trek the Next Generation_ in 1987.  _Firefly_ was cancelled in 2002 so clearly it's time for _Firefly:  The Next Generation.  _Just picture  a series set 75 years in the future with a cameo by an old, old Inara trying to sell the ship to some new young adventurer.  

Okay, that's a terrible idea.  I liked Firefly but it's been 18 years and it's just time to let it go.  Two of the main characters are dead and one of the actors has passed away in real life.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 16, 2020)

MGibster said:


> _Star Trek _was cancelled in 1969 and we got _Star Trek the Next Generation_ in 1987.  _Firefly_ was cancelled in 2002 so clearly it's time for _Firefly:  The Next Generation.  _Just picture  a series set 75 years in the future with a cameo by an old, old Inara trying to sell the ship to some new young adventurer.
> 
> Okay, that's a terrible idea.  I liked Firefly but it's been 18 years and it's just time to let it go.  Two of the main characters are dead and one of the actors has passed away in real life.



Based on what was revealed in the cast reunion, there would be no "old, old Inara."


----------



## MGibster (Dec 16, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> Based on what was revealed in the cast reunion, there would be no "old, old Inara."



I'm old fashioned.  Unless it happens on screen it's not canon.


----------



## FrogReaver (Dec 16, 2020)

Disney: “what do we do with all these expensive mandolarian assets. Let’s reboot firefly!”


----------



## Khelon Testudo (Dec 16, 2020)

_Rebels _was a Star Wars take on _Firefly_.


----------



## GreyLord (Dec 17, 2020)

I don't know...there are some things for it and some things against it I think...

No -

1.  The story as told is basically complete.  Abridge, shortened, and skips some parts, but overall complete.  Unless you want to start retconning the series or rewriting things or rebooting, there's no real reason to revisit it.  Most who like the show really would not appreciate retcons, rewrites, or rebooting the entire things, so that's a Big no on those points.

2.  If you go for a continuation, several of people's favorite characters are dead and it may be hard to some of the old cast to sign back up again.  One big driving factor for the show was the cast.  If you just try to do a continuation with the surviving members of the crew after the movie you'll get some who watch it, but without the charm of some of the old crew, others may be turned off.

3.  Disney almost never follows the storyline, so expect it to be completely changed if they take over it as a continuation.  From the beginning Disney has done it's own thing.  They do not like following what the storylines say they should do.  Sometimes this works out (Snow White, the Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Marvel), sometimes it does not (the Black Cauldron, Star Wars Sequels, Treasure Planet) for a majority of the general audiences.  Expect that if they take over Firefly they will do the same and the new stories will not mesh with the old series.  The tone will be different, the story will be changed, and characterizations will be extremely different.
{PS - In the above, when it does not work out it does not mean it's hated.  There are many who may still love them, for example there are probably tons of people that love Treasure Planet, the Black Cauldron, and the Star Wars Sequels for example, but these movies that don't work for everyone have a divisive character about them that gives a wide range/swath of opinions regarding their faithfulness to what they are based upon with some feeling they are, others they are not and being dissatisfied, and a whole gamut of other feelings towards these types of movies).

Pros

1.  If they put Joss Whedon in charge, though he will still be subject to the whims of Disney, he could use it to enrich and expand the Firefly universe.

2.  If he wipes the slate clean (in otherwords, gets rid of almost all the crew) but retains the ship and maybe one or two of the old cast members (perhaps the captain, or another member) and then has an entirely new crew to the ship, he could use that to create a new show with whatever flavor he wants which allows free agency and freedom to go as he and Disney wants.  This could result in a new approach which could make old fans and new fans happy.

3.  For those who really want more Firefly, it gives the opportunity for the really hardcore fans to get more Firefly.

4.  It gives Whedon (if he get's put in charge) the opportunity to tell new stories within the universe of Firefly which may or may not be connected to the original series.

So, I can see absolute positives and negatives...it would just depend on how it turns out.


----------



## Zaukrie (Dec 18, 2020)

Seems like you could have a different crew and new stories, set in that world.......but when it said family friendly, I started to lose interest. I'd like Disney to stretch a bit........

I would prefer not a reboot, but a new story.....there is plenty of things we don't know (if we only watched the show and movie). Plenty of unexplored stuff.....


----------



## payn (Dec 18, 2020)

The show was fun, but it really was the cast that made it so. The setting? Meh, its pretty generic and not that interesting.


----------



## cmad1977 (Dec 18, 2020)

Firefly isn’t as good as we all remember.
It just doesn’t hold up. 
“Two by two... hands of blue....” 

Cmon...


----------



## nevin (Dec 18, 2020)

Sacrosanct said:


> Firefly couldn't get viewers when it was new.  The whole reason it was cancelled.  It didn't become really popular until after it was cancelled, and thus many fans became fans because suddenly here was a show not treated right by the execs, and it's easy to root for the underdog.  Don't get me wrong, I like the show, but it's gonna have some serious challenges to do a reboot.  Then you've got all the reasons already mentioned about why this is a bad idea.  People will be expecting the original, comparing it to the original like it or not, and they will be disappointed.



Fox wanted a buffy the vampire slayer level of viewership.  But Firefly started out with more viewers than Buffy did it's first season.  And that's after being put in a what was then called the Friday evening Death Slot where fox sent shows to die.  
Also Fox rearranged the shows and the Pilot didn't show till the end.  So if you've ever watched the entire series on the DVD's from beginning to end, Imagine just scrambling the episodes up and watching the pilot as the last one.  

I do think there's a serious chance of people not being happy if it's not very close to the original and if the chemistry between the characters isn't great.  Hopefully they'll have Joss do it and let him do his thing this time without micromanaging him.


----------



## Zardnaar (Dec 18, 2020)

They own Fox, how about Married with Children reboot. Peg Bundy Disney princess.


----------



## Sabathius42 (Dec 18, 2020)

I think it could work if it was an animated series.  They could throw a bucket of cash at Wheden and the cast and see how many returning crew members they could get back on board.

I'd only watch it if it were an animated series for grownups, though.  I've had so many people tell me that Clone Wars is spectacular but I just can't get past Stinky the Hutt (or whatever that character's name was).


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Dec 18, 2020)

nevin said:


> Hopefully they'll have Joss do it and let him do his thing this time without micromanaging him.




Whedon is toxic right now and likely will not be part of any new version.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Dec 18, 2020)

The only way it would work for me is if it's a completely new ship and crew with a totally different storyline set in the same universe. I'm not sure there's a point in making that, but if it were THAT and GOOD, then I guess I'd be in. Otherwise, I just can't imagine it.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 19, 2020)

Khelon Testudo said:


> Yeah... nah.
> It's time has come and gone.
> 
> Is there room for another sf series about a group of witty nomadic mercenary ne'er-do-wells and their ship? Sure! But not this one. Firefly is done.



See, I disagree completely with this. The time has never been better for a sequel show. 

There will never be a right time for a reboot, because the premise is all that’s left in a reboot, and that isn’t what is good about Firefly.

But 15 years later, River is the pilot, Zoe has a teenage kid, Mal is ready to retire and own some land somewhere way out on the edge of known space, and some specter of their past comes back to haunt them? That’s a good show.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Dec 19, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> 15 years later, River is the pilot, Zoe has a teenage kid, Mal is ready to retire and own some land somewhere way out on the edge of known space, and some specter of their past comes back to haunt them? That’s a good show.




I'd watch that. Unfortunately, there's nearly no way on earth that Disney would MAKE that.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 19, 2020)

GreyLord said:


> Treasure Planet



...is one of the best cartoons ever made.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 19, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> I'd watch that. Unfortunately, there's nearly no way on earth that Disney would MAKE that.



Oh of course, that’s part of why I’m opposed to a reboot. Because it’s Disney, is it would be a new cast PG family friendly reboot that is Firefly in name only, and the premise just isn’t interesting enough to warrant that.


----------



## Baron Opal II (Dec 20, 2020)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> Whedon is toxic right now and likely will not be part of any new version.



In what way?


----------



## Zardnaar (Dec 20, 2020)

Baron Opal II said:


> In what way?




 Cheated on his ex wife apparently while preaching feminism. Unless he's done something else idk about.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Dec 20, 2020)

Zardnaar said:


> Cheated on his ex wife apparently while preaching feminism. Unless he's done something else idk about.



That all was a while ago. The latest Whedon cancellation comes from him apparently being terrible to work with during the reshoots on Justice League. The cast appear to be loyal to Snyder's vision, and have nothing nice to say about Whedon (I'm not clear on the details, not being a fan of celebrity gossip, in spite of just here just now perpetrating it).


----------



## Zardnaar (Dec 20, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> That all was a while ago. The latest Whedon cancellation comes from him apparently being terrible to work with during the reshoots on Justice League. The cast appear to be loyal to Snyder's vision, and have nothing nice to say about Whedon (I'm not clear on the details, not being a fan of celebrity gossip, in spite of just here just now perpetrating it).




 Ah ok didn't know that.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Dec 20, 2020)

Baron Opal II said:


> In what way?



Ray Fisher (Cyborg) made several accusations about a toxic work environment and Gal Gadot had to talk to Warner Bros about issues with him.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 20, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> Oh of course, that’s part of why I’m opposed to a reboot. Because it’s Disney, is it would be a new cast PG family friendly reboot that is Firefly in name only, and the premise just isn’t interesting enough to warrant that.



 Remember, the original was broadcast TV, and so was.. PG family friendly.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 20, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Remember, the original was broadcast TV, and so was.. PG family friendly.



It was decidedly not family friendly. 

And like...yes. We all know it was on broadcast TV.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 20, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> And like...yes. We all know it was on broadcast TV.




And thus - none of the content was actually all that mature, because broadcast has limits on content.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 20, 2020)

Umbran said:


> And thus - none of the content was actually all that mature, because broadcast has limits on content.



None of the content was explicit. Explicit =\= mature, and even then “not all that mature” =/= family friendly.


----------



## Khelon Testudo (Dec 20, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> See, I disagree completely with this. The time has never been better for a sequel show.
> 
> There will never be a right time for a reboot, because the premise is all that’s left in a reboot, and that isn’t what is good about Firefly.
> 
> But 15 years later, River is the pilot, Zoe has a teenage kid, Mal is ready to retire and own some land somewhere way out on the edge of known space, and some specter of their past comes back to haunt them? That’s a good show.



Well... it _could _be a good show.


----------



## pming (Dec 20, 2020)

Hiya!

*ReBoot* = Heck NO!

*New Series* taking place after the Serenity movie with all new characters only tangentially related to the originals? = Sure, I'd be down with that. Especially if Joss is the one helming most of the writing and whatnot. Like him or not, as a person, he writes damn interesting and fun characters and stories! 

^_^

Paul L. Ming


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 20, 2020)

Sacrosanct said:


> And you can forget about the original cast getting together, even for cameos.  Some of them may just not do it for one reason or another, and you can believe Adam Baldwin won't be allowed anywhere near it (just imagine the backlash from fans if he did).



If they do a reboot, instead of a sequel, I could easily see Wes Chatham slotting into the role of Jayne Cobb.


----------



## nevin (Dec 20, 2020)

Umbran said:


> And thus - none of the content was actually all that mature, because broadcast has limits on content.



There was a prostitute selling her services openly with the crew.  there may not have been flesh but arguing it was not mature content is a bit silly.


----------



## nevin (Dec 20, 2020)

I'm hopeful it could be a good show.  The mandalorian shows that Disney get's that western type scifi can do well.    With the right director and cast it could work.  I would be at least moderately hopeful if they do try it.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 20, 2020)

nevin said:


> There was a prostitute selling her services openly with the crew.  there may not have been flesh but arguing it was not mature content is a bit silly.



And that's not the only thing. The "wife" assassin. Kicking someone into a running engine. Jayne not thinking shooting someone is good enough, so proceeding to bash his head repeatedly into the ground... I agree.


----------



## Mistwell (Dec 20, 2020)

I think there are more good stories to tell in that universe, even if it's a different group being followed.


----------



## Mallus (Dec 21, 2020)

I’m really of two minds on this. On the one hand, Firefly was lightning in a bottle, a rare instance combining both talent and luck where the characters just _work_ together on screen right out of the gate. Even characters like Mal, blessed as he was with a showy deliberately fake diction that was marvelous.

On the other hand, we got to see precious little of the story, even with the wrap-up film.

So... why not? Just do it. Art is hard and nothing is sacrosanct. More Firefly will probably be bad — because most things are — but maybe it’ll be good.


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Dec 21, 2020)

Mallus said:


> So... why not? Just do it. Art is hard and nothing is sacrosanct. More Firefly will probably be bad — because most things are — but maybe it’ll be good.




You have a good point. What do _we_ have to loose? If it's good, we can have something to enjoy, and if it's not (even if that's likely) we can just _turn it off_.  Disney and whoever works on it has far more at stake, but that's on them. Might as well go for it.


----------



## darjr (Dec 21, 2020)

Good luck.

I loved Firefly and HATE that it was cancelled for dumb and possibly terrible reasons. 

I hope they create something wonderful.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 23, 2020)

From the comic verse 20 Years Later: A New Firefly Series With Wash & Zo's Daughter, Emma


----------



## Khelon Testudo (Dec 23, 2020)

Doing a sequel with the offspring of the previous characters is sufficiently different for it to work... except really, I don't think the Firefly universe is all that interesting.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 24, 2020)

trappedslider said:


> From the comic verse 20 Years Later: A New Firefly Series With Wash & Zo's Daughter, Emma



I...guess that is an idea. 

I am quite doubtful that it will be any good, barring really good cast chemistry.

It’s so close to a good idea...


----------



## FitzTheRuke (Dec 24, 2020)

The solicitation for "Firefly Brand New 'Verse" Comic reads:

_Set 20 years after the events of Firefly, Serenity soars the 'Verse once again with a new captain – Emma, the daughter of Wash and Zo !

The old crew of Serenity has gone their own way and now Emma is working to prove herself to Zo , alongside a new crew of castaways and misfits just trying to stay afloat.

But when Serenity takes a job from a familiar face, they discover that their new, living, breathing cargo    is far more than they bargained for…and might bring them into conflict with Alliance once again!_

...Take that for whatever you will.


----------



## Richards (Dec 24, 2020)

I'm guessing right now that the "familiar face" is one Malcolm Reynolds.

Johnathan


----------



## Zardnaar (Dec 24, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> The solicitation for "Firefly Brand New 'Verse" Comic reads:
> 
> _Set 20 years after the events of Firefly, Serenity soars the 'Verse once again with a new captain – Emma, the daughter of Wash and Zo !
> 
> ...




 Something like that is better than a reboot. 

 Right cast and writers might work.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 25, 2020)

I didn't watch that serie. The option of a spiritual succesor is possible. The reboot could allow to add lot of new things, for example more characters with psionic powers, transgenic humanoids (not alien neccesary), ravagers as a mixture of necromorphs(Dead Space) + borgs (Star Treck), rival factions between the interstellar dominion (not only the classic evil megacorporations but also secret societis/deep state), androids and ginoids with organic "brains", digital inmortality and mind upload used to punish political prisoners who altered memories to think they are guilty for crimes they didn't commited, in penal colonies of forced works. Sects about alien civilitations creating failed utopies...

The true key is to do a right work, not only good stories and evolution of the characters, but also an interesting setting.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 25, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> I didn't watch that serie. The option of a spiritual succesor is possible. The reboot could allow to add lot of new things, for example more characters with psionic powers, transgenic humanoids (not alien neccesary), ravagers as a mixture of necromorphs(Dead Space) + borgs (Star Treck), rival factions between the interstellar dominion (not only the classic evil megacorporations but also secret societis/deep state), androids and ginoids with organic "brains", digital inmortality and mind upload used to punish political prisoners who altered memories to think they are guilty for crimes they didn't commited, in penal colonies of forced works. Sects about alien civilitations creating failed utopies...
> 
> The true key is to do a right work, not only good stories and evolution of the characters, but also an interesting setting.



Ummm....did you see the movie? I'm guessing you meant reavers not ravagers, and the movie established how they came to be and Joss has confirmed the nonexistence of aliens in this particular universe, which is also set in a single star system. None of what you suggest sounds remotely like Firefly and sounds more like a mish-mash of different sci-fi shows.


----------



## Omand (Dec 25, 2020)

trappedslider said:


> Ummm....did you see the movie? I'm guessing you meant reavers not ravagers, and the movie established how they came to be and Joss has confirmed the nonexistence of aliens in this particular universe, which is also set in a single star system. None of what you suggest sounds remotely like Firefly and sounds more like a mish-mash of different sci-fi shows.



@trappedslider I have found that LuisCarlos is all about throwing together all universes into one, no matter what genre or topic you are talking about.  For D&D he wants a every single setting rebooted in a Crisis of Infinite Earths style crossover event caused by chronomancers (some sort of time travel accident pulls everything together).  For Sci-Fi he evidently wants every major franchise pulled together as well.

You can try reasoning that these things cannot occur due to the reasons you have given, but he appears unlikely to be swayed.

Cheers


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 25, 2020)

You are right about a "mish-mash" of different ideas. Why not? The future of the entertaiment industry is the multimedia franchises. Firefly can't be only a space wester because other companies also can produce their own titles with the same formule. 

Maybe Firefly was a good serie, but sci-fi gets old fastly, and its universe was not enough "sandbox" for roleplayers, not if it compared with other IPs. It is not so fun if you are not Serenity crew or a rip-off.

And today lots of no-Chinese Asians wouldn't confortable if Chinese culture is too present in the reboot but others don't (not only Japan and Korea). I mean the no-Chinese Asias could ask their own positive discrimination quota. 

My suggestion for Disney+ is adapting Alien Legion by the seal "Epic Comics", Jim Starlin's Dreadstar or "the Swords of the Swashbucklers" by Bill Mantlo. These IPs are easier to sell merchadising as toys, comics....


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 25, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> You are right about a "mish-mash" of different ideas. Why not? The future of the entertaiment industry is the multimedia franchises. Firefly can't be only a space wester because other companies also can produce their own titles with the same formule.
> 
> Maybe Firefly was a good serie, but sci-fi gets old fastly, and its universe was not enough "sandbox" for roleplayers, not if it compared with other IPs. It is not so fun if you are not Serenity crew or a rip-off.
> 
> ...



The "space western" and limited scope are part of the property's charm. Change that and it's not the same show, nor is it even in the same storytelling universe. In that case just make another series with all of those elements and not call it anything related to "Firefly."

It's like trying to run a D&D campaign that ranges from medieval fantasy to Sci-Fi when there's already a perfectly good RPG (TORG) to fill that role


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 25, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> You are right about a "mish-mash" of different ideas. Why not? The future of the entertaiment industry is the multimedia franchises. Firefly can't be only a space wester because other companies also can produce their own titles with the same formule.
> 
> Maybe Firefly was a good serie, but sci-fi gets old fastly, and its universe was not enough "sandbox" for roleplayers, not if it compared with other IPs. It is not so fun if you are not Serenity crew or a rip-off.
> 
> ...



so you want something new,not Firefly got it.


----------



## Omand (Dec 25, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> You are right about a "mish-mash" of different ideas. Why not? The future of the entertaiment industry is the multimedia franchises. Firefly can't be only a space wester because other companies also can produce their own titles with the same formule.
> 
> Maybe Firefly was a good serie, but sci-fi gets old fastly, and its universe was not enough "sandbox" for roleplayers, not if it compared with other IPs. It is not so fun if you are not Serenity crew or a rip-off.
> 
> ...



@LuisCarlos17f  I have gathered that English is not your primary language, so I think one thing is getting lost in translation in our discussions.

Multimedia does not mean that you take every genre and mash it together to make the future of entertainment.  Multimedia means that you produce a property (Firefly, Star Wars, D&D) in several different types of media (film, television, computer games, RPG, etc.).

You may know this, but the post I have quoted seems to indicate you think that Firefly/Serenity has to be mashed up into something else because that is multimedia, that only being a space western is not enough for multimedia.

Cheers 

Edited - Spelling and Grammar


----------



## MarkB (Dec 26, 2020)

FitzTheRuke said:


> _But when Serenity takes a job from a familiar face, they discover that their new, living, breathing cargo    is far more than they bargained for…and might bring them into conflict with Alliance once again!_



So that's Baby Yoda's next gig.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 27, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> I am quite doubtful that it will be any good, barring really good cast chemistry.






Zardnaar said:


> Right cast and writers might work.




Um, folks, you missed a thing - this is a _COMIC BOOK_ series.  Not TV.  There is no cast.









						New Firefly Series Set 20 Years After Original Series Is Coming From Boom Entertainment
					

It's been confirmed that a new Firefly series from Boom Entertainment, Firefly: A Brand New Verse, [...]




					comicbook.com
				




_"A Brand New Verse _is being written by Josh Lee Gordon, *with artwork by Fabiana Mascolo, and cover art by Qustina Khalidah*. It is set to hit stores on March 10, 2021."



Spoiler: Here's some artwork


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 27, 2020)

__





						Media franchise - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Is it better to say "transmedia franchise"?

---

It's true, English isn't my mother tongue/first language. 

I don't mind if the name is ravager or reavers. The fact is I can't believe a group of mad men can drive a space ship but using some dummies-proof technology. If you have played some strategy game you know the impact of the wear. And the reavers aren't the type of people who can survive enough for at least three generations. 

I didn't talk about aliens in the Firefly universe but about people who believe in the existence of aliens. That is an important aspect.

And today the "Alliance/Union of Allied Planets" may be potentially politically incorrect. It is not only by the bad relations between Chinese, Japanese and Sourth-Koreans, but also in the 2021 the public opinion will think different things about China because there are happening some facts in our real life.

I am not against the trope of evil megacorporation but the abuse of this. 

Maybe you are right, if the changes are too much it is better to star from zero with a new franchise as a spiritual succesor. 

We can't forget the high-tech, for example robots who nanotechnology to repair airships, 3D-printers and LED light for underground farming, allowing hidden "dungeons" as post-apocalypse bunkers. Or the secret of eternal youth being discovered, thanks the regenation of the telomeres (you can imagine the social impact when you end the university but you can't find a job because nobody retires), or "the club of the inmortals", important people whose minds are upoloaded to a high-tech server.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 27, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah that's not Firefly which is a space western.
fom wiki _Firefly_ is an American *space Western *drama,I think you said you haven't seen it...you should check it out. Because you keep tossing out ideas that have almost nothing to do with Firefly.

Some of what you said has more to do with Alter Carbon than Firefly.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 27, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A multimedia franchise is a production that ties in different mediums, in order to expand upon the basic story. It can use traditional broadcast media, internet streaming, virtual reality, games..... That doesn't really apply to Firefly. The only SciFi show that I can currently think of that this label would apply to, is "Defiance." That was a Science Fiction series that was filmed in Toronto (the sets, down along the lake front, were rather amazing). It was not just a TV series but also a video game and things that happened in the video game were incorporated into the story for TV.









						Defiance (TV series) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Omand (Dec 27, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> A multimedia franchise is a production that ties in different mediums, in order to expand upon the basic story. It can use traditional broadcast media, internet streaming, virtual reality, games..... That doesn't really apply to Firefly. The only SciFi show that I can currently think of that this label would apply to, is "Defiance." That was a Science Fiction series that was filmed in Toronto (the sets, down along the lake front, were rather amazing). It was not just a TV series but also a video game and things that happened in the video game were incorporated into the story for TV.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



@Ryujin I think Star Wars and Star Trek would like to have a word with you about not being considered current SciFi universes that are multimedia.  

@LuisCarlos17f The name is not the issue here.  You could call something Multimedia or Transmedia, they are similar and related concepts as that Wikipedia article indicates.

Maybe I am being unclear in my argument, but you seem to be arguing that in order for Firefly/Serenity to be multimedia/transmedia you have to mash in a whole bunch of other things (necromorphs, corporations, etc.).

But that is not the definition of what multimedia is.  Anything can be multimedia.

Firefly/Serenity as a space western can be multimedia (I would agree with @Ryujin and @trappedslider that it is not currently multimedia).  In order for it to be multimedia there simply would need to be development to get the characters and setting into something more than the TV/Film niche it is currently in.  So, perhaps some computer games, comics (which appears to be on the way as per @Umbran), novels, etc.  It can be a space western and become multimedia without adding any other genres to the mix.

Anyways, I am beating a dead horse so I will leave it there.

Cheers


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 27, 2020)

Omand said:


> @Ryujin I think Star Wars and Star Trek would like to have a word with you about not being considered current SciFi universes that are multimedia.



I suppose that would depend upon your definition of the term. To me, it means more than just having presence in various media. It's about the interconnectivity of the story between those media. That's why I specifically named "Defiance"; because what happened because of players in the video game had an effect upon the story, on TV.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 27, 2020)

I don't mind very much if transmedia or multimedia franchise is the right term. What word do you suggest to use? I only say Disney's strategy should be managing the IPs to be different types of products. It would be something like "don't put all the eggs in only one basket". 

There was a project for an online videogame based in Firefly, but it has been too many years ago.









						Firefly Online - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




I have seen the wiki about the RPG and it says the most of sourcebooks are modules and almost nothing of crunch or added new lore/background. 

* I admit after buying my Eclipse Phase RPG I miss the mind uploading+digital inmmortal in the rest of sci-fi IPs.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 27, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> * I admit after buying my Eclipse Phase RPG I miss the mind uploading+digital inmmortal in the rest of sci-fi IPs.











						Altered Carbon (TV series) - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 27, 2020)

I bought Eclipse Phase RPG, the Spanish translated version and published by Edgeent, time before of Altered Carbon teleserie. The list of attributes or abilities scores are still too confusing for me, but the lore allows a lot of different stories and the crunch is the wet dream of all muchkin, although I warn you the exugernt menace (terminator+borgs+resident evil+alien xenomorphos) can be too dangerous even for PCs who can enjoy digital inmortality.


----------



## Richards (Dec 27, 2020)

There have been Firefly comics out for years now, as well as a couple of novels; I have _The Magnificent Nine_ and _Big Damn Hero_ but I think there may be one or two more out there.

Johnathan


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 27, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Um, folks, you missed a thing - this is a _COMIC BOOK_ series.  Not TV.  There is no cast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ah, okay. That is fairly small news, then. There's been Firefly comics for years.


----------



## Imaculata (Dec 27, 2020)

I'd love a new Firefly series, but I'm not sure if I would enjoy it as much without the same actors, characters and writers.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 28, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> I bought Eclipse Phase RPG, the Spanish translated version and published by Edgeent, time before of Altered Carbon teleserie. The list of attributes or abilities scores are still too confusing for me, but the lore allows a lot of different stories and the crunch is the wet dream of all muchkin, although I warn you the exugernt menace (terminator+borgs+resident evil+alien xenomorphos) can be too dangerous even for PCs who can enjoy digital inmortality.



The closest to what you're wanting is Altered Carbon, everything you want is not what firefly is nor should it ever be imo.


----------



## Argyle King (Dec 28, 2020)

Maybe they could just say Firefly and Star Wars are part of the same universe (but don't know it).

Star Wars has an area of unexplored space and wild space (and other vaguely defined parts of the map). 
Firefly also has unexplored (or extremely hostile) areas of space.
Perhaps the two universes are simply on opposite sides of one big unexplored, wild, and hostile area.


----------



## Dioltach (Dec 28, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Maybe they could just say Firefly and Star Wars are part of the same universe (but don't know it).
> 
> Star Wars has an area of unexplored space and wild space (and other vaguely defined parts of the map).
> Firefly also has unexplored (or extremely hostile) areas of space.
> Perhaps the two universes are simply on opposite sides of one big unexplored, wild, and hostile area.



Unfortunately Firefly is set in the future, and Star Wars is set "a long time ago". Too many fans would see that as an insurmountable hurdle.


----------



## Argyle King (Dec 28, 2020)

Dioltach said:


> Unfortunately Firefly is set in the future, and Star Wars is set "a long time ago". Too many fans would see that as an insurmountable hurdle.




I suppose so, but it's a matter of perspective. Past and future are terms which require a definition of when "now" is to have meaning.

In a saga which includes sequels, prequels, and some pieces which may or may not be canon (depending upon who is writing,) I believe room exists for it to be possible.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 28, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> I suppose so, but it's a matter of perspective. Past and future are terms which require a definition of when "now" is to have meaning.




With respect, an audience in 1977 was told "a long time ago".  They were speaking _to that audience_.  That sets "now".  

It is also "in a galaxy far, far away".  Meaning, not the galaxy the viewer is in.  Not the Milky Way.  But Firefly happens to people who do not have FTL travel, and are explicitly originated on Earth - and so must still be in the Milky Way.  

So, really, they aren't in the same place and time.  Sorry.

And this all besides the fact that the rumors have turned out to be about a comic book, and there's no sign of a TV show to be concerned with.


----------



## Redthistle (Dec 28, 2020)

The film ended certain story lines and relationships, and events in the real world ended others. 

Rest in Peace, Ron Glass. 

From "Barney Miller" to "Serenity" and everything between and after those, you always raised my appreciation for the entertainment you contributed to.

As with old friends I haven't seen in a long time, I wonder how the characters are doing. How did the events in the film change the direction of their lives? Did any of them continue working together? Where in the 'Verse are they now?

If Disney were to engage the original actors/characters as they have become all these years later, I'd be interested in catching up with them.

As others have already observed above, it was those relationships that made Firefly matter to us.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 28, 2020)

I am afair it is not the best time for a reboot, or not with the same Union of Allied Planets and their Chinese-Western mixture. In the real world 2021 is going to be a very, very, very hertic year, with radical changes linked with China. How to explain it softly with an example? Do you remember Resident Evil 6 with actions in a Chinese city? Today it is not the right time for a title about a zombie apocalypse in China, is it? Something like that. For a time, at least a complete year, maybe more, talking about China will be not a confortable thread, but previous historical imperial age, too interesting time, like in the Chinese curse. 

* Why not a CGI animation? Today it may be very realistic, people are used for cartoon for mature audence, and with the epidemic it will be safer. 

Or a comic with those crazy crossovers, for example with Transformers, or Aliens vs Predator. 

* Reavers are too crazy and fools to travel through the space. Can they repair and keep the space-ships? They shouldn't surive more two generations, even if they could infect others with their bloodthirsty madness.

* A reboot of the sci-fi movie "the black hole" would be easier, or a sequel of "the planet of the threasure".


----------



## MarkB (Dec 28, 2020)

LuisCarlos17f said:


> * Reavers are too crazy and fools to travel through the space. Can they repair and keep the space-ships? They shouldn't surive more two generations, even if they could infect others with their bloodthirsty madness.



Reavers don't repair and keep spaceships, they take them and then run them into the ground, and then they take new ones to replace them. We get mentions of how Reaver ships run with their reactors unshielded - that's presumably not because they're deliberately stripping off the shielding, it's because they're running them well past their tolerances, and then keeping on running them until they finally break down or break up.


----------



## BrokenTwin (Dec 29, 2020)

I don't think the Reavers have been around that long in-universe, have they? Miranda was their origin point, and happened within a generation or two at most. It's entirely possible that their numbers have been dwindling since then (captive replacements notwithstanding), and within a generation or two they may die out entirely without any form of unified action against them.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 29, 2020)

BrokenTwin said:


> I don't think the Reavers have been around that long in-universe, have they? Miranda was their origin point, and happened within a generation or two at most. It's entirely possible that their numbers have been dwindling since then (captive replacements notwithstanding), and within a generation or two they may die out entirely without any form of unified action against them.



I got the impression that it was within the characters' lifetimes that the Miranda incident occurred. There would be no new Reavers, as what created them no longer exists. At least it seems like they dropped that particular line of research after the incident. Given that they tend to rape/kill/eat anyone that they come across, and the massive losses from the end of "Serenity", there aren't likely to be all that many left anyway.


----------



## Argyle King (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> With respect, an audience in 1977 was told "a long time ago".  They were speaking _to that audience_.  That sets "now".
> 
> It is also "in a galaxy far, far away".  Meaning, not the galaxy the viewer is in.  Not the Milky Way.  But Firefly happens to people who do not have FTL travel, and are explicitly originated on Earth - and so must still be in the Milky Way.
> 
> ...




and yet "now" also includes a television show which is currently on: the Mandalorian


----------



## MarkB (Dec 29, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> and yet "now" also includes a television show which is currently on: the Mandalorian



How is that relevant? You want an opening slide on The Mandalorian that says "slightly longer ago, but still just as far, far away"?


----------



## Umbran (Dec 29, 2020)

Johnny3D3D said:


> and yet "now" also includes a television show which is currently on: the Mandalorian




So?  That is still a long time ago.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 29, 2020)

MarkB said:


> How is that relevant? You want an opening slide on The Mandalorian that says "slightly longer ago, but still just as far, far away"?



Or, given a recent reveal, just as long ago and equally as far away.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 29, 2020)

BrokenTwin said:


> I don't think the Reavers have been around that long in-universe, have they?






Ryujin said:


> I got the impression that it was within the characters' lifetimes that the Miranda incident occurred. There would be no new Reavers, as what created them no longer exists.




So, Wheadon has said that a lot of what's in the movie is stuff we would have seen in the second season of the show, had it had a second season.  However, it isn't exactly clear how much the origin of the Reavers may have changed, which can be seen in one notable plot hole...

Miranda, in the film _had 30 million people on it_.  But somehow, the entire 'Verse forgets its existence within their own lifetimes?  That doesn't make a lot of sense.  It can make more sense if there's more time, for example - the longer the Alliance has to erase Miranda, the better.

Beyond that, in the episode _Bushwhacked_, we see example of a new Reaver created, and the episode tells us Mal has either seen it before or has heard of it happening. Whether this happens because the chemical agent used on Miranda is transmissable, or a new Reaver comes about through pure psychological trauma of watching what Reavers do, is never established.


----------



## embee (Dec 29, 2020)

I loved Firefly for what it was: a space western with just a soucant of "The Continuing Adventures of Han Solo."

But the reason it worked was because it didn't work. 

Firefly originally did not work. It was shown out of order, was given death time slots and inconsistent ones at that, got butchered by pan & scan, was advertised as something it wasn't (a wacky space comedy), and existed at a time before binge-watching. 

Firefly was a happy accident that got rediscovered once it made its way to DVD and Netflix. It ushered in the era of binge-watching and was boosted by being the "failed" show by the creator of Buffy. 

But the charm of it was from not just the cast but also the scrappy underdog story of its failure (even if it was a bit inside-baseball),  

Hard pass. Let the past die and build something new.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 29, 2020)

I guess the final choise will be to produce a spiritual succesor, the same formula/way/method but within Star Wars, because this is a better hook for the audence. We only would need a group of charismatic people, somebody you would become friend if they were your coworker.


----------



## MarkB (Dec 29, 2020)

embee said:


> I loved Firefly for what it was: a space western with just a soucant of "The Continuing Adventures of Han Solo."
> 
> But the reason it worked was because it didn't work.
> 
> ...



None of that happened with its UK broadcast, and I still managed to enjoy it just fine, when it was first shown, for its own sake, not for any meta reasons.


----------



## Nikosandros (Dec 29, 2020)

MarkB said:


> None of that happened with its UK broadcast, and I still managed to enjoy it just fine, when it was first shown, for its own sake, not for any meta reasons.



Indeed. Back then, Firefly didn't air in Italy. When I moved for two years in the US, Serenity came out in the theaters. I was vaguely aware that it was based on a TV show. I went to see it and I really loved it and later bought the series on DVD and loved it even more.


----------



## Deset Gled (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Miranda, in the film _had 30 million people on it_.  But somehow, the entire 'Verse forgets its existence within their own lifetimes?  That doesn't make a lot of sense.  It can make more sense if there's more time, for example - the longer the Alliance has to erase Miranda, the better.




I don't think it was forgotten, just covered up.  

The recording from the rescue ship that the Serenity crew found says something like "It wasn't what we expected; it wasn't a war or a terraforming event."  Clearly, the government was confused when they lost contact with Miranda .  They had no idea what happened, and sent the rescue ship for recon.  After getting that transmission, it would have been relatively easy to just lie and report that it had been some sort of disaster that killed the colony and made it toxic due to radiation/disease/technobabble.  The reavers would actually help that cover up by killing any scavengers or conspiracy theorists who came searching.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 29, 2020)

Deset Gled said:


> I don't think it was forgotten, just covered up.




No.  It was forgotten.  As I recall, when the crew of Serenity learned about it they went, in effect, "Miranda?  What's that? Never heard of it."  If it had been sold as a massive accident or catastrophe within their lifetimes, folks would remember it, because it took _30 million_ lives.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> So, Wheadon has said that a lot of what's in the movie is stuff we would have seen in the second season of the show, had it had a second season.  However, it isn't exactly clear how much the origin of the Reavers may have changed, which can be seen in one notable plot hole...
> 
> Miranda, in the film _had 30 million people on it_.  But somehow, the entire 'Verse forgets its existence within their own lifetimes?  That doesn't make a lot of sense.  It can make more sense if there's more time, for example - the longer the Alliance has to erase Miranda, the better.
> 
> Beyond that, in the episode _Bushwhacked_, we see example of a new Reaver created, and the episode tells us Mal has either seen it before or has heard of it happening. Whether this happens because the chemical agent used on Miranda is transmissable, or a new Reaver comes about through pure psychological trauma of watching what Reavers do, is never established.



None of those things are plot holes. 

30 million people on a planet with little outside contact, kept under wraps by the government, and then all mention of it scrubbed from records, is entirely believable. It's quite likely the verse has multiple times more population than modern day Earth, and who is going to remember a small unremarkable world like Miranda? The test subjects were probably chosen in part to avoid selecting one part of a large but close extended family, which isn't hard to do, nor is it hard for such a government to shut up any family that does come looking. 

The overwhelming majority of people never knew Miranda existed in the first place.

We know Miranda happened during the lifetime of the crew, because Reavers showed up during that timeframe. There is no reason for Mal not to have seen or heard about people becoming Reavers, if they've been around since the war or before it. While they don't explicitly say that the new Reaver came about purely by way of trauma, it is the implication of the episode, and the theory of the show's main character in the episode. Of course, an unanswered question isn't a plot hole.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> No.  It was forgotten.  As I recall, when the crew of Serenity learned about it they went, in effect, "Miranda?  What's that? Never heard of it."  If it had been sold as a massive accident or catastrophe within their lifetimes, folks would remember it, because it took _30 million_ lives.



No, that doesn't necessarily follow. This is a world in which whole colonies being lost is extremely unlikely to be a unique or even decade defining event. 

And most people probably never heard of the place to begin with, or ever heard about 30 million people being lost, or anything.


----------



## MarkB (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> No.  It was forgotten.  As I recall, when the crew of Serenity learned about it they went, in effect, "Miranda?  What's that? Never heard of it."  If it had been sold as a massive accident or catastrophe within their lifetimes, folks would remember it, because it took _30 million_ lives.



Wash remembers there being a call for colonists to settle there, but nothing after that. For it to have been so completely forgotten, information about the place would have had to be suppressed right from the start, even before there was any disaster. Essentially, it was planned as a science experiment from the beginning, and was isolated to keep the testing environment clean, and to ensure nobody knew what was actually happening there.

Certainly a huge undertaking, and an implausible one, but not entirely impossible. The Firefly 'verse has a huge number of terraformed moons and planets in its one star system, many of which have a whole slew of issues, and communication can get flaky out past the inner worlds.


----------



## Umbran (Dec 29, 2020)

doctorbadwolf said:


> No, that doesn't necessarily follow. This is a world in which whole colonies being lost is extremely unlikely to be a unique or even decade defining event.




Upon what do you base that?  

We have no direct canon statement as to the population of the 'Verse.  The non-canon number we have is about 50 billion people.  To scale, then, the loss of Miranda would have been equivalent to about _4 million people_ dying in a single event on our Earth today. 

Basically, it should be about the equivalent of _nuking Los Angeles_.


----------



## Deset Gled (Dec 29, 2020)

MarkB said:


> Wash remembers there being a call for colonists to settle there, but nothing after that. For it to have been so completely forgotten, information about the place would have had to be suppressed right from the start, even before there was any disaster. Essentially, it was planned as a science experiment from the beginning, and was isolated to keep the testing environment clean, and to ensure nobody knew what was actually happening there.
> 
> Certainly a huge undertaking, and an implausible one, but not entirely impossible. The Firefly 'verse has a huge number of terraformed moons and planets in its one star system, many of which have a whole slew of issues, and communication can get flaky out past the inner worlds.




I'll also throw out there that the name "Miranda" was probably not the name that it would be remembered by.  Everybody knows about Chernobyl, the number of people that recognize the name Pripyat is much smaller, the number of people who remember Shipelicki village is lower still.

Also, what percentage of people in the current western world could name the Banqiao Dam failure, the San Juanico disaster, or the Bhobal chemical spill off the top of their heads?*

*Edit: Full disclosure, the only one I could remember the full name of myself without googling was Bhobal, and I couldn't spell that without checking.  And I totally cheated by using Wikipedia to pull out the disasters with the most deaths.  I was going to go with the Boston molasses incident and 2005 BP oil explosion on my first round.


----------



## Deset Gled (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Upon what do you base that?
> 
> We have no direct canon statement as to the population of the 'Verse.  The non-canon number we have is about 50 billion people.  To scale, then, the loss of Miranda would have been equivalent to about _4 million people_ dying in a single event on our Earth today.
> 
> Basically, it should be about the equivalent of _nuking Los Angeles_.




Upon what do you base your assumption that we're wrong?  We have the canon as presented by the movie as proof.  You have to prove it's wrong for it to be a plot hole.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> Upon what do you base that?
> 
> We have no direct canon statement as to the population of the 'Verse.  The non-canon number we have is about 50 billion people.  To scale, then, the loss of Miranda would have been equivalent to about _4 million people_ dying in a single event on our Earth today.
> 
> Basically, it should be about the equivalent of _nuking Los Angeles_.



Except people know about Los Angeles, it's been around for generations, it's a central hub of trade and culture.

The number of people doesn't actually impact the likelyhood of covering it up all that much. What we have is a small town on the frontier, run by government doctors, abandoned when the experiment went bad, and no maps show it's location, no record speak of it, etc.

30 million people doesn't make it so people know anything about it. Wash recalls a call for colonists, but nothing else. That seems pretty normal. Why would the govt even announce tht those people are dead or that the colony failed? Just quietly erase all mention of the place and move on, let the public be distracted by other stuff.


----------



## Dioltach (Dec 29, 2020)

Also, it's stated somewhere that standard practice for new colonies was to dump the population on a moon or planet and let them fend for themselves. So presumably, until they can establish themselves as a viable trading partner or other form of destination, the rest of the 'Verse has no meaningful information about them.

If this happens with, say, a dozen new colonies, it's not hard to imagine that nobody wonders much about one that doesn't make contact.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Dec 29, 2020)

30 millions in a far planet in Firefly universe would be like 30 people killed by a terrorist attack in a far African town, or dead for a (air)shipwreck in the news of the real life. And if it was the place of a secret experiment then then name would be hidden since the first moment. I guess a solar system in a "rich zone" could be fifteen billios of inhabitants.


----------



## Ryujin (Dec 29, 2020)

Umbran said:


> No.  It was forgotten.  As I recall, when the crew of Serenity learned about it they went, in effect, "Miranda?  What's that? Never heard of it."  If it had been sold as a massive accident or catastrophe within their lifetimes, folks would remember it, because it took _30 million_ lives.



I vaguely recall someone (Kaylee?) mentioning something about remembering advertising for colonists for Miranda. Could be wrong.


----------



## trappedslider (Dec 29, 2020)

Ryujin said:


> I vaguely recall someone (Kaylee?) mentioning something about remembering advertising for colonists for Miranda. Could be wrong.



She mentions it and then says something about being told the terraforming didn't take hold.


----------



## thebitterguy (Feb 3, 2021)

Are we taking WGTC seriously now?


----------



## Deset Gled (Feb 3, 2021)

thebitterguy said:


> Are we taking WGTC seriously now?




Multiple geek news outlets are reporting this now.  For example: Exclusive: Firefly Reboot Coming To Disney+


----------



## Umbran (Feb 3, 2021)

Deset Gled said:


> Multiple geek news outlets are reporting this now.  For example: Exclusive: Firefly Reboot Coming To Disney+




That report is from two months ago.

As was noted earlier in the thread, the whispers were about a _comic book_ series, not TV.








						New Firefly Series Set 20 Years After Original Series Is Coming From Boom Entertainment
					

It's been confirmed that a new Firefly series from Boom Entertainment, Firefly: A Brand New Verse, [...]




					comicbook.com


----------



## Deset Gled (Feb 3, 2021)

Umbran said:


> That report is from two months ago.




As is this thread.


----------



## embee (Feb 3, 2021)

Deset Gled said:


> As is this thread.



That is not dead which can eternal lie
And with necroposting
No threads ever die.


----------



## LordEntrails (Feb 21, 2022)

From January 2022... 
Claim they got a verified insider who has confirmed a reboot.

Disney+ show
Will not be family friendly.
Will not account for Serenity events (i.e. Wash may not be dead)
Written, Produced, Directed by same people as Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett.
Firefly class ship will appear as an Easter egg somewhere else before the show goes live.


----------



## Imaculata (Feb 21, 2022)

LordEntrails said:


> *Written*, Produced, Directed by same people as Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett.




Uh oh!


----------



## CleverNickName (Feb 21, 2022)

LordEntrails said:


> Claim they got a verified insider who has confirmed a reboot.
> 
> Disney+ show
> Will not be family friendly.
> ...




This does not spark joy.


----------



## Greggy C (Feb 22, 2022)

LordEntrails said:


> Written, Produced, Directed by same people as Mandalorian and Book of Boba Fett.



I was so excited to watch a bounty hero series, crossing the galaxy location to location, taking down dangerous gangsters on the run, killing han solo wannabes.

Instead I got an old man getting his ass whooped by a child tusken raider.


----------



## South by Southwest (Feb 22, 2022)

Disney.....haven't they ruined enough already?


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Feb 22, 2022)

Greggy C said:


> I was so excited to watch a bounty hero series, crossing the galaxy location to location, taking down dangerous gangsters on the run, killing han solo wannabes.
> 
> Instead I got an old man getting his ass whooped by a child tusken raider.



On the other hand, I would have been bored to tears with the first one, and loved what we actually got.


----------



## Mallus (Feb 22, 2022)

South by Southwest said:


> Disney.....haven't they ruined enough already?



<recalls Prequel Trilogy>

I’ll take Disney ruining Star Wars any day! They can light it up like Alderaan.

Also, aren’t the Star Wars crew — Favreau, Filloni, etc. — a bit busy to be involved in a Firefly reboot? Not that I’m questioning a YouTuber’s anonymous inside source…


----------



## billd91 (Feb 22, 2022)

South by Southwest said:


> Disney.....haven't they ruined enough already?






Mallus said:


> <recalls Prequel Trilogy>






Yeah, I’m totally on board with Disney+ “ruining” things.


----------



## South by Southwest (Feb 22, 2022)

I have no love for the SW prequels, but I don't see where that's even relevant to whether or not I _ought_ to love the SW sequels (or _Pirates of the Caribbean LXIII_ or _Avengers: Battle for the Galactic Supercluster_ or any of the rest of it). Can't a lad dislike both?

Some decent writers and many fewer focus groups: that's about all I think it would take.


----------



## Dioltach (Feb 22, 2022)

LordEntrails said:


> Firefly class ship will appear as an Easter egg somewhere else before the show goes live.



If only they could redo the scene where Mando is looking for a replacement for the Razorcrest. "I got your message. You say you've got a replacement for - wait, not that old rustbucket? What else have you got?"


----------



## Redthistle (Feb 22, 2022)

Dioltach said:


> If only they could redo the scene where Mando is looking for a replacement for the Razorcrest. "I got your message. You say you've got a replacement for - wait, not that old rustbucket? What else have you got?"



But ... but ... it's shiny.


----------



## delericho (Feb 22, 2022)

A few years ago, I would have thought this was great.

But I'm not interested in a Firefly reboot without Whedon, and in light of recent revelations I'm not interested in _any_ project involving Whedon.


----------



## BrokenTwin (Feb 22, 2022)

Well, I do have to give Disney credit for ruining my desire to see my nostalgic favorites rebooted or continued. Ironically, the quote that comes to mind is one that from their current biggest franchise zombie:

"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."


----------



## Imaculata (Feb 22, 2022)

It's not Firefly, if it doesn't have its excellent writing. You would need to hire the original writers, or at least a team of writers that can write episodes AS good or better than the original show.


----------



## Baron Opal II (Feb 22, 2022)

How many new cast would you need? Ron Glass passed.

Or would this be a more Battlestar Galactica reboot where only the larger themes and key names would be the same?


----------



## ART! (Feb 22, 2022)

Aeson said:


> Disney Plus Reportedly Rebooting Joss Whedon's Firefly
> 
> 
> Joss Whedon still hasn't washed off the stench that Justice League left on his career, and if anything, it could mark the beginning of a downward spiral following Ray Fisher's accusations of misconduct. Once the Cyborg star went public with his claims and invited legal action from Whedon's...
> ...



We Got This Covered + "reportedly" = probably nonsense.

That said, it's a setting worth exploring. As much bad stuff as has come out about Whedon, I want to say I hope he's not involved...but then I really dug _The Nevers_! Agh!


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 26, 2022)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> As much as I like Nathan Fillion, even he could not make Firefly watchable for me, so maybe a better version from Disney would be a good thing. Plus it would give those weird Star Wars haters some sci-fi to watch on Disney+.



Yep, I never understood why this show got so much traction.  I just never got into it.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 26, 2022)

ART! said:


> <SNIP> As much bad stuff as has come out about Whedon</SNIP>



So maybe this is the reason.  A reboot ala _Battlestar Galactica_ but without Whedon in any way shape or form in order to make the brand more 'Disney' appropriate (i.e. Woke not kid friendly)


----------



## Maxperson (Feb 26, 2022)

billd91 said:


> Yeah, I’m totally on board with Disney+ “ruining” things.



7, 8 and 9 weren't much better than 1, 2 and 3.  Worse in some ways.  And then there's Rogue 1 and God help me, but I liked Solo.  Solid movies.  The Mandalorian is good.  Disney is hit and miss, and here's hoping that they hit with the Firefly reboot.


----------



## Staffan (Feb 27, 2022)

Thunderfoot said:


> Yep, I never understood why this show got so much traction.  I just never got into it.



To a large degree, because of this:


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 27, 2022)

Staffan said:


> To a large degree, because of this:



Well, to be fair; that's mostly just Nathan being Nathan.  Let's face it even in his serious roles, he's got mad one-liner/reactionary skills.


----------



## Imaculata (Feb 27, 2022)

It's also just great witty writing.

Lets see:

On this episode the crew of Serenity take on a job from a creepy guy called Nishka, to rob a train. The train heist doesn't go as planned, but Mal and Zoey escape by pretending to be a newly wed couple. Inara's respectible status as a compagnion ends up getting them out of trouble. But while there, they learn that they've stolen medical supplies that the people on that planet badly need. Mal has a change of heart, and decides to return the supplies, but makes a powerful enemy in the process.

By golly, is that a plot structure? I think it is! I wish the Mandalorian had a plot structure


----------



## Aeson (Feb 27, 2022)

Somehow, I read great witty writing as gritty writing at first. It had me scratching my head. My bad.


----------



## Maxperson (Feb 27, 2022)

Staffan said:


> To a large degree, because of this:



That's the scene that hooked me.


----------



## Greg K (Feb 27, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> That's the scene that hooked me.



yeah, that was a great scene


----------



## MarkB (Feb 27, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> It's also just great witty writing.
> 
> Lets see:
> 
> ...



You mean, like if he'd taken on a contract to retrieve a wanted bounty for some unpleasant Imperials, things had gone wrong and he'd had to get helped out by the friends he made along the way, but he eventually completed the job only to realise that he'd handed what was essentially a child over to some very nasty people. So he got the child back, but made a powerful enemy in the process.

That kind of plot structure?


----------



## Staffan (Feb 27, 2022)

Thunderfoot said:


> Well, to be fair; that's mostly just Nathan being Nathan.  Let's face it even in his serious roles, he's got mad one-liner/reactionary skills.



It's not just the one-liner. It's the build-up of long-hair-guy, who has a very distinctive appearance and all the trappings of a recurring enemy, and then just _pushing him into a jet engine_. That was a pretty strong signal that this was not your typically heroic show.


----------



## ART! (Feb 27, 2022)

Thunderfoot said:


> So maybe this is the reason.  A reboot ala _Battlestar Galactica_ but without Whedon in any way shape or form in order to make the brand more 'Disney' appropriate (i.e. Woke not kid friendly)



"Woke"? What is this, 2018? 

Sounds like Disney has made a smart business decision.


----------



## trappedslider (Feb 27, 2022)

Aeson said:


> Somehow, I read great witty writing as gritty writing at first. It had me scratching my head. My bad.



Glad i'm not the only one

Also: Summer Glau (enough said lol)


----------



## Mallus (Feb 27, 2022)

ART! said:


> "Woke"? What is this, 2018?



It’s 1984. We have always been at war with Wokedisney. Also, ignorance is strength!


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 27, 2022)

ART! said:


> "Woke"? What is this, 2018?
> 
> Sounds like Disney has made a smart business decision.



I agree, Whedon's a douchebag.  My point was Disney used to have standards that were kid friendly, now they have different standards, meh.


----------



## ART! (Feb 27, 2022)

trappedslider said:


> Glad i'm not the only one
> 
> Also: Summer Glau (enough said lol)



I'll see your "Summer Glau" and raise you "Morena Baccarin"!


----------



## MarkB (Feb 27, 2022)

ART! said:


> I'll see your "Summer Glau" and raise you "Morena Baccarin"!



I find your lack of Jewel Staite disturbing.


----------



## trappedslider (Feb 27, 2022)

Also Summer's feet


----------



## Deset Gled (Feb 27, 2022)

Thunderfoot said:


> My point was Disney used to have standards that were kid friendly, now they have different standards, meh.




I'd place Firefly at an equal level of kid-friendliness as the Indiana Jones franchise (Mola Ram could be roughly as traumatizing as Reavers?), and Disney started featuring that in their parks in 1989.


----------



## Aeson (Feb 27, 2022)

trappedslider said:


> Also Summer's feet



I'll never get the feet thing. Not to kink shame anyone. I just tend to lose interest below the knees.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 27, 2022)

Deset Gled said:


> I'd place Firefly at an equal level of kid-friendliness as the Indiana Jones franchise (Mola Ram could be roughly as traumatizing as Reavers?), and Disney started featuring that in their parks in 1989.



Yeah, the early to mid-80s saw their change from kids only to entertainment empire.  _Splash!_ was their first departure when they showed Daryl Hannah's naked butt in a long shot when she walked out of the Hudson Bay.  Now that wouldn't even be talking point.  But, every iteration has their standards.  I think the _Fierfly_ rumor had more traction now than if this had been announced say, 5 years ago?  And with Mr Whedon suddenly in the media crosshairs again, it gives Disney some leverage over rights.  A case of 'striking while the iron is hot' so to speak.


----------



## Aeson (Feb 27, 2022)

Thunderfoot said:


> Yeah, the early to mid-80s saw their change from kids only to entertainment empire.  _Splash!_ was their first departure when they showed Daryl Hannah's naked butt in a long shot when she walked out of the Hudson Bay.  Now that wouldn't even be talking point.  But, every iteration has their standards.  I think the _Fierfly_ rumor had more traction now than if this had been announced say, 5 years ago?  And with Mr Whedon suddenly in the media crosshairs again, it gives Disney some leverage over rights.  A case of 'striking while the iron is hot' so to speak.



On Disney+ they did a piss poor job of trying to cover her butt. They digitally extended her hair.


----------



## Ryujin (Feb 27, 2022)

Aeson said:


> I'll never get the feet thing. Not to kink shame anyone. I just tend to lose interest below the knees.



Tiny ballerina feet? Just guessing here, because she did years of ballet.


----------



## Dausuul (Feb 27, 2022)

South by Southwest said:


> I have no love for the SW prequels, but I don't see where that's even relevant to whether or not I _ought_ to love the SW sequels (or _Pirates of the Caribbean LXIII_ or _Avengers: Battle for the Galactic Supercluster_ or any of the rest of it). Can't a lad dislike both?
> 
> Some decent writers and many fewer focus groups: that's about all I think it would take.



I actually wish Disney _would_ remake the prequels, because the failings of 1-3 are mirror images of the failings of 7-9.

1-3 had a fantastic, well-thought-out, intricate plot, in service of a sweeping vision; a grand tragedy encompassing the parallel falls of the Republic and of Anakin Skywalker. Unfortunately, that plot was shackled to terrible writing, bad direction, and acting which ranged from "Christopher Lee exerting all his immense talent to breathe some semblance of life into his lines" to "Hayden Christensen mumbling about sand." Then add massive overuse of early CGI, and some cartoonishly offensive ethnic stereotypes thrown in for good measure.

7-9 was solid in all the areas 1-3 fell short. The nuts and bolts were fine. Disney is good at those. But the plot was an incoherent mess and there was no real vision for any of it. (Episode 8 managed part of a vision, but Johnson left it tangled and Abrams chose the Alexander approach to untangling it.)

A remake of the prequels would, at worst, be just another botched Star Wars trilogy... and at best, it would marry Lucas's grand vision to Disney's craftsmanship and make the movies we were all hoping to see when the curtains rose on "Phantom Menace."

...Anyway. As far as Firefly goes, I think it's well named. It flashed for a moment in the dark and now it's gone. The setting wasn't the source of the magic. It couldn't be remade properly without Joss Whedon, and it certainly won't be made _with_ Joss Whedon after recent revelations, so that's that.


----------



## Thunderfoot (Feb 28, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> I actually wish Disney _would_ remake the prequels, because the failings of 1-3 are mirror images of the failings of 7-9.
> 
> 1-3 had a fantastic, well-thought-out, intricate plot, in service of a sweeping vision; a grand tragedy encompassing the parallel falls of the Republic and of Anakin Skywalker. Unfortunately, that plot was shackled to terrible writing, bad direction, and acting which ranged from "Christopher Lee exerting all his immense talent to breathe some semblance of life into his lines" to "Hayden Christensen mumbling about sand." Then add massive overuse of early CGI, and some cartoonishly offensive racial stereotypes thrown in for good measure.
> 
> ...



Wow, THAT, is probably the most well thought out and humble scathing rip I've ever seen.  That's an assassin style murder of not one but two franchises.   ^5.  

But on a serious note, you have a point.


----------



## trappedslider (Feb 28, 2022)

Aeson said:


> I'll never get the feet thing. Not to kink shame anyone. I just tend to lose interest below the knees.



It's a joke in the fandom that her feet and the ship itself are characters 10 and 11 due to Joss's foot fetish thing


----------



## delericho (Feb 28, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> A remake of the prequels would, at worst, be just another botched Star Wars trilogy... and at best, it would marry Lucas's grand vision to Disney's craftsmanship and make the movies we were all hoping to see when the curtains rose on "Phantom Menace."



I disagree. I think a remake of the prequels would be likely to lead to a backlash from the 'fandom' so toxic as to leave the entire franchise irradiated and unusable for a 1,000 years.

(And, unfortunately, I'm not sure whether I'm joking or not.)


----------



## Snarf Zagyg (Feb 28, 2022)

trappedslider said:


> It's a joke in the fandom that her feet and the ship itself are characters 10 and 11 due to Joss's foot fetish thing




Quentin Tarantino.
Joss Whedon.
Todd Phillips.
Mel Gibson.

Who are four well-known Hollywood creatives that are like Rex Ryan, Alex?


----------



## Baron Opal II (Feb 28, 2022)

Imaculata said:


> It's also just great witty writing.
> 
> Lets see:
> 
> ...





MarkB said:


> You mean, like if he'd taken on a contract to retrieve a wanted bounty for some unpleasant Imperials, things had gone wrong and he'd had to get helped out by the friends he made along the way, but he eventually completed the job only to realise that he'd handed what was essentially a child over to some very nasty people. So he got the child back, but made a powerful enemy in the process.
> 
> That kind of plot structure?




Girls, girls, you're _both_ pretty!  

I enjoyed the Mandallorian and Firefly. They both have their high points and issues, and both were a cut above standard sci-fi fare.


----------

