I think that it's pretty obvious that, without the fans showing their support, both verbally (letters, websites, etc) and, FAR more importantly, financially, the movie would not have come to pass.

Mother's milk leads to heroin.

If there hadn't been a loyal fanbase, Joss may have dropped the whole thing and crawled into bed licking his wounds for a year.

But "the dedication of Firefly fans" didn't make the movie. Universal's business decision to drop 40 million on the joss to woo him from 20th made the movie.

From the aforementioned article:

"I was a Whedon stalker," laughs Mary Parent, Universal's now-outgoing vice chairman of production, who dug Whedon's vision and no-surrender passion. She also recognized a potentially marketable Cinderella story. A modestly budgeted film, Parent believed, was a gamble worth taking, and in September 2003, Universal optioned the rights from Fox. "I thought this band of underdogs could make for a cool movie," she says. "But I did want to see a script first."

But perhaps the dedication of the Firefly fans was one of the things that made Universal think that dropping 40 million on the joss would be a reasonable business decision.

I don't get it, P-C, is that supposed to prove me wrong or something?

But perhaps the dedication of the Firefly fans was one of the things that made Universal think that dropping 40 million on the joss would be a reasonable business decision.

Well sure. I don't think that they'd give Joss 40 to pop a zit on his ass for 75 minutes. (which isn't to compare Serenity to ass puss)

Don't get me wrong. I don't think they'd have greenlit anything that wouldn't return the investment, and obviously, there's a large enough fanbase for them to turn a profit on the film.

But it wasn't like, "omigod, Firefly fans ARE SO AWESOME AND DEDICATED! Let's call Joss and give him money!"

I don't get it, P-C, is that supposed to prove me wrong or something?

No, it's supposed to prove you right.

I don't get it, P-C, is that supposed to prove me wrong or something?

I thought it was supposed to prove you right, but maybe I'm misreading. I think it shows that 1. this was about a Universal exec, not a vocal fanbase 2. that while it wasn't about the fanbase, the fanbase part makes a good story, which makes good copy, which, the exec hopes, will make good money 3. that it is more about business with Joss than anything else. All of which are points I've seen you (and Kristen, too, I think) make repeatedly.

eta: x-post!

My crabbiness on the subject, I realize, is probably annoying and spoiling the party. I've found some of the marketing for the flick to be somewhat exploitive of fans and the lengths they'll go through to preserve the thing they love. Some lameass person charged with selling a lameass video game recently called upon the fans to write letters saying they wanted Verizon to buy their lameass game, when Verizon passed.

And all I could think was that the fucker was preying upon the fans' feelings of being in a constant underdog position, in order to sell his game for him. Dude, you're fucker #52698 who's trying to profit off of Mutant Enemy in some way. If your game is lame, it doesn't benefit the fans.

And that sort of thing, I think, exploits the myth that the fans made it all happen. But there's no smoking Tabasco gun. When they talk about the dedication of the fans being the sole reason for the flick, there's no specific examples of how. It's sort of a hazy statement with nothing to back it up.

Did fans campaign for a movie? Are they talking about the fan tables at conventions? DVD sales? Give me a few examples, Universal, of how the fans' dedication was the reason for all of it.

I mean, truly, there's nothing I'd love more than to see that the fans were able to just win something on their own steam. It's rare, and it gives hope to other fan campaigns with nobel efforts.

I think Wonderfalls fans won a bit, that the petition helped prove that there was a market for DVDs, for example. And while it wasn't the sole reason, it certainly helped to have a brick of paper as a visual aid.

I didn't want a Firefly movie. I wanted to see Firefly on my television set EVERY week. I wanted lots and lots of good stories--stories that I knew Joss could give us.

As thrilled as I am with the movie, every time I hear the theme song on SciFi on Friday nights, my anger kindles anew.

I don't see Serenity as a win for fans. I see it as a nice consolation for Joss that we just happen to be able to enjoy.

Yay for

Whedon hopes Serenity makes money so he can do a trilogy, even see it return to TV.

from a 2005-08-14 Sunday Times article on Serenity, but what is this intelligent Spider-Man he speaks of?

Whedon is relieved. "There have been some disasters out there this year," he says. "But there is still some room for more intelligent entertainment. Batman and Spider-Man have proved that."

Edit: the indent that adds line breaks is not the real indent.

My crabbiness on the subject, I realize, is probably annoying and spoiling the party. I've found some of the marketing for the flick to be somewhat exploitive of fans and the lengths they'll go through to preserve the thing they love. Some lameass person charged with selling a lameass video game recently called upon the fans to write letters saying they wanted Verizon to buy their lameass game, when Verizon passed.

Yeah, I didn't mess with that. I actually have ideas about what I would want a Firefly/Serenity game to look like, and I think the only way I would support such a project would be if it were a game I actually wanted to play. You're right, everyone is exploiting the fans here. I think, and this makes me a bit sad, that I have grown an almost Darwinian attitude - these fans seem to enjoy being exploited (always have, really), and while that makes the people exploiting them bad and assholes, it doesn't really feel like it's worth the energy to get angry about. But I'm all about conserving energy, lately. A couple years ago I would've been totally pissed off.