My answer:
In providing back-story after the fact (retcon), they (the writers) explained a previously seemingly inconsistent set of story elements in such a way that they negated (jossed) my more well thought-out explanation (fanwank), but the new canon seems to me to be largely inconsequential to the plot, because it is just the tying together of a bunch of previously aired story elements, in an attempt to cater to the fans in a somewhat manipulative fashion (fanwank-y).
(Yes, I have spell check. Why do you ask?)
If Inara had a shower scene and the Operative was played by The Rock, Serenity would be the number one movie in the country. Suddenly I'm at ease with how Serenity is performing. It sure didn't sell out.
Have you seen
The History of Violence?
I've heard it's a very good movie. Not starring The Rock.
So neither you nor Cindy can spell "manipulative"? What a coincidence!
I can spell it. I just couldn't type it.
Judges? 10 - 10 - 10!
likes Eddie
Actively shuns Gris, P-C, and NarrAtor.
Have you seen The History of Violence? I've heard it's a very good movie. Not starring The Rock.
I haven't seen it but I have heard mixed things about History of Violence. True no Rock but Vigo who is a bigger draw and of course apparently there's lowest common denomiator appeal. IMO, without any of that I doubt it's even a blip on the radar.
You live in a more rarified world than I if Viggo's a bigger draw there than The Rock.
But I've heard good things about it from people I trust -- right here in the Movie thread, amongst other people, so I wouldn't feel comfortable judging it as lowest common denominator without actually seeing it myself.
I mean, I've heard mixed things about
Serenity
too.
It's by Cronenberg, who is a director with a strong body of work. It has a great cast. It's got, from what I have heard (I am going tonight), a literate and nuanced script which deals with some thought-provoking ideas. There are plenty of lowest common denominator films out there, but this ain't one of them.
Actively shuns Gris, P-C, and NarrAtor.
So, how's your team doing, Ms. Red Sox Nation. Oh, that's right -- LOST.
You know, in thinking about this, it occurs to me that some of the "hand wringing" could be due to all the advance screenings and how far out they were from the theatrical release. A lot of the hardcore fans saw the movie (perhaps more than once) months ago. So they've already had their happy squee moment and, now, are over that and looking ahead to more.
I've been wondering about this myself, and I'm coming to the conclusion that a lot of the conventional wisdom about this movie is wrong -- I didn't mind Book and Wash dying much, but then, I'm not a sentimental sort. But a lot of other old "Firefly" fans are ballistic over some of these things. On the other hand, everyone I know who DIDN'T watch Firefly, but who saw Serenity, was just entirely blown away. I think, on a lot of levels, the movie worked better for people coming to it cold.
But then, I never get people who freak out because a character dies, although I understand them more than I understand militant 'shippers.
I did wonder about the movie being considerably less explicit than the broadcast TV show, what with the glossing over of Inara's profession and the discreet pan up from the Kaylee/Simon tryst that would have been at home in the end of a 60s Bond movie. But I suppose there was enough violence essential to the plot that Joss wanted to protect the teen-friendly PG13 rating.
I did wonder about the movie being considerably less explicit than the broadcast TV show, what with the glossing over of Inara's profession and the discreet pan up from the Kaylee/Simon tryst that would have been at home in the end of a 60s Bond movie
That pan up to River's face peeking down got one of the biggest laughs in the screening I was in.
