What is Digg?114 Comments
- exick, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17"I loved the firefly series but was disappointed with the movie ...it seemed like an 2 hr episode of firefly."
No ***** *****. What were you expecting, a two-hour episode of Murder She Wrote?
I'm all for a second season of Firefly, as unlikely as that seems at this point, but I have no interest in anything in the post-Serenity timeline. If it doesn't have Wash, you might as well not bother. - inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10> Maybe people are digesting the whole firefly franchise after
> having their arteries clogged with star wars.
1999 called. It wants its trendy Star Wars bashing back. - bonedaddy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Oy.
Please, if you aren't in the industry, don't make wild speculation. Whoever posted this clearly has no idea how this sort of thing works. DVD/VHS and other such ancillary markets have long since eclipsed the actual box office take. This is why the whole "videogames are making more than movies" argument is so flawed; it only takes into account box office receipts. The studio took that into account when making Serenity. The fact is that it still underperformed. - danimal3114u, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6hey, guess what. A lot of movies make more money from DVD than they do from box office, especially ones that didn't do well in theaters. Shockingly, so did Serenity....
- duke_nate, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8"That's $6million."
You noob, it made more than 6 million on opening weekend. Get your numbers straight.
And, we don't want a sequal. WE WANT SEASON 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - ngageguy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Not holding my breath, but crossing fingers for second season instead of sequel movie. There is enough garbage on TV, lets put something good back on.
**"I can kill you with my brain" - River Tam - Firefly/Serenity** - szelij, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You know, Serenity in all respects represents a proven resource to take out into a new field. They know that the popularity of Serenity was boosted by the Internet and illegal downloads so why not just sell new episodes that way straight via the Internet?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ok how about this guys: someone sell their start-up to google for 40 million and spend 15 million to sponsor a new season of firefly.
- kleinishere, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2what's the freaking hype all about? this movie was just another sci-fi action film that wasn't really that special whatsoever.
- redcard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Oh. That's good. Call yourself "browncoats". Run around treating anyone who doesn't think Serenity/Firefly is viable like crap. Look, you brown coats ran around blabbing that Firefly was great, and that you'd prove to everyone how fox made a big mistake in cancelling it when the movie came out.
Serenity made $39 million in the box office, not a paltry sum, but the top five grossing movies of last year were sci-fi/Fantasy.
Star Wars III $380,000,000
Harry Potter $287,000,000
Narnia $282,000,000
War of the words $232,000,000
King Kong $214,000,000
So.. not bad for a sci-fi flick? Please.
The Fantastic Four netted $154,000,000.
The remake of Lost in Space in 1998 made $69,000,000.
Guys, Big Momma's House 2 is going to end up with nearly twice what Serenity did.
Someone said "Not bad for a sci-fi movie." The fact is, it's not even close to what more than a few bad sci-fi movies made. - Metman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Wow .. great article for people who are bad at math.
Bet the author plays the lottery (a tax for people who are bad at math).
39 + 10 = 49 - 25 - 13 = 11 .. not 28
No wonder the movie bombed, look at the IQ of the media promoting it! - redcard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@lsm2005
And then all the other companies should be allowed to factor in DVD sales from related shows and endorsements/others into their Box Office gates. Stargate is now one of the most popular movies of all time, if we were to follow that logic.
It'd still end the same way. Serenity sucked from a business standpoint. Studios could be making more money over the span of time by putting $49 million into mutual funds.
I'm sorry. NO SEQUEL. It's not going to happen. The brown coats said the fans would step up, and they didn't. It just didn't work. - kyoung989, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2No Digg.
I growing number (I'd say most, but I have no research to back that up) movies make more on DVD sales than at the box office. A few examples: LOTR trilogy, Finding Nemo, Shrek 1 & 2, Pirates of the Caribbean, Old School...
Here's a very old news article about it:
http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-04-21-master-movies_x.htm - knupso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You have the technology to zip around the galaxy, but everyone rides horses once they get there. I don't get it.
- Spaztic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I watched Serenity after the love displayed on this board...I was watched firefly....
The movie was marginal at most. It just dosn't appeal to a mainstream audience. - talmand, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3lordatlas...
It's because the theatres aren't as much fun anymore.
Plus, few people are willing to drop $20 (or more) for a film in the theatre they know little about. They'll wait until rental ($4) and if they like it they may buy the DVD ($15). Maybe.
And Whedon is not for everybody. - scarper86, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2_Every_ movie makes more on ancillaries (DVDs etc.) than the first-run box office these days.
- bonlebon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Maybe people are digesting the whole firefly franchise after having their arteries clogged with star wars.
- kailam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll never really understand why people insist on arguing passionately over personal opinions. Some people didn't like the movie or the series, others loved it. What good does it do to post a message saying "the movie sucked - give it up!"? Are people that annoyed because fans want more of what they love? And I don't mean to pick on the non-fans exclusively - all flaming is pretty pointless to me - but it sure seems like, whenever fans are discussing a topic intelligently, someone inevitablely chimes in with a "movie was lame" comment, without any real argument, statement, or obvious motive other than to simply derail the thread. Wha?? Why?? Why humans so stupid?
At any rate, although there is no question there are a lot of loyal fans of Firefly/Serenity, the stats seems to indicate that there simply aren't enough. This is a cult following. Joss himself says he makes his shows to be cult hits. That means the world's not gonna fall in love with it. A select group of people with similar minds and interests are going to love it, the rest of world is gonna shrug their shoulders and walk away.
Firefly did some amazing things with its cult following. Not as amazing as Buffy or Angel did with thier cults, but not too bad either. When the show seemed dead, we got a movie. But in the end, I just don't think the fan base was big enough to support the franchise. I think we should be happy and grateful with what we've got. We put up a good fight, but after all the browncoats did lose the war. ;) - iainkid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4> 1999 called. It wants its trendy Star Wars bashing back.
Well, the jerk store called. They're running out of you!
- George Costanza - zyklon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I surely hope that they release at least a special edition. The movie was fantastic.
- Makr, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Okay, you want ***** TV, okay. Look at what is on TV right now. it's stupid and crazy. At least firefly was original and whole lot better then CSI: Miami or the x number of shows based off of Law & Order.
- jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Didn't it cost like $60 million to make? So either they just broke even or they lost money on it.
- cyberghost232, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Serenity was great. I grew up on star wars and eps 1 2 3 were not that good. I dont see how people could like star wars and not give firefly/serenity a chance. Firefly was something new and different thats why it didnt catch on. If you havent noticed people want to see the same old ***** over and over again. Looks whats coming out next. Mission Impossible 3 hundred an ninety million. C'mon. I cant be the only one thats tired of the same ol *****. needed somethinng different. Joss gave that to us and they spat in his face. Look at G4. Need I say more. ***** morons discust me. Uh! Man I need to unplugg.
- redcard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@jagg
Because these are Joss Whedon fans.. more than they are Serenity/Firefily fans. These are the kind of people who'll forget all about Serenity/Firefly when Whedon makes the "next Buffy/Angel" - lax01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is old news and I think a repost on Digg...
- terrya64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why is this news? Most movies make more from the dvd.
- redcard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The fact is, yet another raunchy comedy is more likely than another Serenity movie. I love Serenity, and I love Firefly, but we simply need to accept the fact that the show was so niche (and screwed by fox) that it did not draw the viewers it needed, and that the movie just wasn't advertised to the rest of the world well enough.
Sure.. us geeks saw it twice.. maybe three times in theatres.. but every time I went to see Serenity in theatres (four times, baby!), I didn't see any one but the geek contingent. How do you expect a movie to be popular if it doesn't reach out to all audiences?
American Pie 47 will sell better than Serenity.. and that's just a fact. - vertino, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2like bonedaddy mentions above, the studio took one look at thge DVD sales of Firefly on DVD, then green-lit Serenity based on that - knowing full well that they would make a profit.
- anvilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0My reaction on leaving the theater after Serenity was "Strong initial showing." - not the blowout I was hoping for but better than most. I understood why it wasn't doing better with the non-fan population.
However, I take this as a hopeful sign - my daughter bought me the series as a gift and the family watched it together. Halfway through the series my wife said "I'm so disappointed. When this is over there won't be any more! This is just SAD." Our copy of Serenity will arrive this week (and there will be great rejoicing). - neenor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ craigm01 Where can we find the afore mentioned articles?
- mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A good question , where did this go to?????
"rumored advertising cost at approximately another $10 million"
10 million for a few seconds of advertising? - redcard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The show was cancelled partially because of Fox's timing on the show and when it showed the episodes, and mostly because people just couldn't get into it in the numbers Fox needs to sustain it's advertisers. Look, Joss is a great guy. He's uber intelligent and scary good at directing/producing. But he's just not a seller anymore in the market of Prime Time TV. It's just a fact. People didn't want what Joss had to ffer. There's no two ways around it.
Sure.. us geeks showed up.. but.. the people that matter are the rest of the world. They didn't show up. Thus, the show didn't make it. End of story. - TransmitThis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Firefly / /Serenty was good IMHO realy liked it, but then I liked Farscape
and they pulled that, I thing they just dont like me.... lol ;) - MoonDogAFO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ redcard:
Are you seriously attempting to compare the effort behind "Serenity" to those “blockbuster” movies? Because, with the exception of “Lost in Space” (which lost money), the only thing that they share is that they can be grouped into a "science fiction" genre. We can, however, use those movies as examples of studio support thru advertising/marketing budgets (if you can find them) helping to make a difference at the box office:
Star Wars - Revenge of the Sith: $??
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire: $50 million
Chronicles of Narnia – Lion, Witch & Wardrobe: $60 million
War of the Worlds: $??
King Kong: $100 million (est)
Fantastic 4: $??
Lost in Space: $20 million (?)
For those movies that I couldn’t find the advertising/marketing numbers for, we can perhaps agree that a LARGE amount was spent…much more than what was spent of “Serenity”. The International Herald Tribune recently published a story on current movie business trends, from which this is an excerpt: "Consider this: the average cost to market a film domestically in 2004 was $34 million, roughly half the $64 million average price tag to make one, according to the Motion Picture Association of America. Blockbusters cost even more to market: as much as $60 million domestically and $125 million worldwide."
Does anyone think that a real marketing effort was put forth here, especially when Universal didn’t even spend what the IHT article lists as the 2004 average on marketing? Serenity was never destined to be a summer blockbuster like the movies redcard tries to compare it to, but wouldn’t it have been interesting to see if it could have performed if some effort and dollars had been devoted to it?
Perhaps the studio just didn’t believe in the movie – who knows. I tend to believe that the studio depended on the Browncoats movement, as well as word of mouth from the running of the series on SciFi Channel, to bring out people on the cheap. I know that I rarely saw any TV ads on the big networks (Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS).
As much as I want to see a Firefly, Season 2; or a Serenity 2, I am resigned to dollars and cents behind the scenes. If it happens – yea for me. If not, I’ll deal. - SuchisLife, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Being an Aussie Like Sh0ckWave, I agree that preparation for the movie could have been handled better in Aus.
As he pointed out, the series still has not had any air-time on the commercial stations. I'm not saying that it would have had a dramatic effect on the box office figures (considering the Australian market is minuscule in comparison to the US), but it certainly wouldn't have hurt to push the series onto one of the commercial stations BEFORE the movie was released. This would have provided an opportunity for a fan base to develop. I didn't see the movie simply because it didn't look like much on the surface.
A friend just lent me his copy of the series which I've just finished watching, and I have to admit I was enthralled by it. Certainly ***** on the majority of other crap they're running at the moment. I mean, how many flavors of CSI or Law & F-ing Order do you need?
I'll definitely be buying my own copy of both the series and the movie, if I can find a place that still has them in stock. The link newbietheatre provided earlier in the thread are out of stock http://www.ezydvd.com.au/item.zml/783862
I'm not surprised the DVD sales have eclipsed the box office figures in this country anyway. It was also a big disappointment to find out there won't be a further series. - starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0well, what i see them doing is trying to create a new model for production of series and movies. it looks to me like they took nitch TV series that was canceled. promoted it on Scifi Channel. promoted the movie on Scifi channel using the canceled series. did ok at the box office in a bad box office year. did good on DVD. i think this is exactly what they wanted and expected to happen.
so i think there will be more movies. i think they are delvoping a new franchise with many more to come. thats just me... thinking again. - Adamesq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I knew nothing about the series and rented this based on reviews. I thought the acting was horrible, the writing was abysmal and the plot was OK. So much of it clearly ripped ideas and exploited them from other movies. I felt that it looked like some B feature on Sci-Fi - then found out it was a series. Funny. I don't think sci-fi movies are more "intellectual" than in the past to any degree...just darker.
- sh0ckWave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I find it interesting that we're comparing a movie which everyone admits only had a smattering of followers with movies that have hundreds of thousands if not millions of people who are fluent with the story. The only exception would be Star Wars Part 4, which to be honest at the time of its release was not really up against a vast number of movies similar in its genre. Star Wars was and always has been an excpetion to the rule.
Going through the list of Harry Potter, Narnia, War of the Worlds, Lord of the Rings .. all these were hugely popular novels before they were ever made into movies. And lets see if anyone on the entire movie going planet DOESN'T know what happens in King Kong before they go and see it. Comparing Serenity to those is not really a valid argument, all those stoies had their fan base many many many years before the movies ever came out (and by came out I mean were produced and released in their newly found CGI glory).
On the flip side of the coin the number of 'poor' movies that are released these days is horrendous, some of them you have to agree are given funding not through having a fan base, or plot, script, or anything else essentailly movie related at all .. but just through the producers having a good salesmen and being able to rope in a named actor (eg. What the hell is DeNiro doing in that awful not very scary horror movie ??).
Now I wasn't part of the firefly fan base that waved flags and wore old cordenroy jackets to further Joss's cause. In fact I only just watched the series and the movie over the last day or two (I'm taking some time off work and thought I'd see whats out there), hence why I'm here because I wanted to find out if the show is (ever) going to continue.
Yep I enjoyed it.
It was an enthralling new angle on a now familiar theme, and I found it far more entertaining then this utter crap that goes as Sci-Fi these days. Pretty people in beautiful places, all filmed in front of blue screen and every actor easily replaceable with the cardboard cut out you can by of them from any store around 2 seconds after the film is released. I know I'm in the minority but thats not what I want to see.
Will the movie make money in the box office ??
I doubt it.
In Australia it received a brief television advertising campaign, but the images flashed up so fast you had no idea who was who or what was going on. I didn't know the story since FireFly was never released on TV here and I don't have FoxTel/Cable/PayTV, so it simply LOOKED like another space show aimed at the typical sci-fi market. If they'd done some homework with the advertising they could have adopted a number of different angles which WOULD have dragged me by the ear to the cinema to see it, and thats saying something since I hate the cinema. I love good movies, but as someone else mentioned beforehand being in a room with a few hundred other people, most of whom want to talk on their phones or shout obscenities to their mates is not very appealing any more.
I completely agree with a few post'ers who said this series/movie is a niche market. It sure as hell is, but these days it seems that ANY movie that has a refreshing storyline or characters is either a 'niche' market or is a ripped off version of a foreign film. If Holywood made movies like Serenity I would be going to the cinema a whole lot more and might even be happy with the thought of my hard earned dollars being used to buy a movie producers new ivory backscratcher. I sincerly hope the movie makes enough money to forward a sequal, as I'd very much enjoy watching their exploits in a new story. But instead I'm sure we're going to get more feel good movies of inner city women looking for Mr Right, more word-up homey flicks, and more cops and robbers episodes. Its easy money because people like a quick fix for 2 hours, but I guess thats where I'm different because I like a movie that creates a world, places genuine characters in that world, and then can actually spend time showing these people interacting in a believable and dare I say 'human' fashion. For me the sci-fi aspect was just a bonus.
As for the brief commenst questioning why we would be using horses in the future, I fully agree with a return post which said that people on a frontier would not have access to vast technologies. Their mere location inhibits them from it, and unless they access to refineries, mechanics and metalurgists they wouldn't be able to repair these things either. Tonto would be a grease monkey if the lone ranger drove a car.
If you need more proof of the vast technologies available to them, check out the episode 'Trash' where the bin seems to be running Windows (at least in the future some things are in their rightful place).
Peace. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0w00t :0
- eadnams, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am a hardcore browncoat, and loved the movie, but being realistic:
Lots of comments I could make, but one that stands out, as someone who works in the TV/film industry, There are a few things that Hollywood Marketing people look at.
1) WHO is in it, they can calculate how many dollars each big name in the film cast/crew will generate on opening weekend. It's a nifty binder just full of names matched with dollars, Serenity had no big names however, that hurts opening gross.
2) The marketing budget is directly related to the opening weekend gross, this is because the opening weekend ticket sales are directly related to marketing, not word of mouth/media reviews. Reviews/Buzz dictate the rest of the gross *following* the opening weekend. Opening weekend, (aside from some exceptions the slow build movies, [Napoleon Dynamite, My Big Fat Greek Wedding, etc]), are what the studio looks at for potential sequels/spinoffs.
DVD sales are changing this tho, so lets hope we get more Firefly/Serenity! Joss has said, there's nothing stopping Fox from starting it up again, or someone else from buying the TV rights. Universal only has the Film rights. - Makr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Uh No, Joss is always open to more anything if the money is there for it. He would do more Buffy and more Angel if there was money and all the actors were availible. it's the same for Firefly.
- MoonDogAFO, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ jkfan87
Since one of my degrees is actually IN advertising, I may actually be as smart as the people who marketed this movie. However, I in no way indicated that I thought I was. I was merely making a point - the movies that redcard compared to Serenity were all in the class of "summer blockbuster", and enjoyed the generous advertising/marketing budget that comes with that designation.
Hell, for all we know they scratched more advertising $$ after getting bad exit interviews from test audiences. I know I probably would if I had to answer to investors and corporate brass. My point is that Serenity did not enjoy a lot of studio support. While it may have helped the film's bottom line, there is no real way of knowing.
Also, getting such support by no means guarantees quality, either. Just look at Lost In Space, or many of the more recent "blockbusters". - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Doesn't pretty much every movie make more from DVD/toy sales than the actual box office. If I wasn't lazy/didnt have to go to work, I'd dig up my old film class notes and verify that Top Gun was the first movie to do that.
- heil, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Personally, the bottom line is I loved the movie and will get the DVD asap.
The budget and box-office don't worry me(as I used to but it doesn't matter anymore). Note that there are very good movies that may not come under the hollywood's definition of a "HIT" movie.
One of my favourite science related movies in the recent past is Pi http://www.pithemovie.com/gifpage.html amongst live action movies and of course I can't rule out Ghost in the shell.
I understand the creators/crew of the film need to get back something from all their efforts.....But after many years pondering on such thing, I realise i can't change how people choose (taste of films/music etc....) and money seems to reflect these.
But strictly personal from my perpective for myself I don't need some critic or a box office countdown to tell which movie I need to watch. - knupso, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1No still don't get it. If they are just zipping around a solar system it has an awful lot of habitable planets. I could see a use for livestock for a food source, but horses for travel come on be realistic. The modern day car is more reliable and not to mention faster than a horse. I would hope that a civilization that has technology that far surpasses our own, has something more efficient and reliable than the modern internal combustion engine. Face it the mainstream ain't buying the space western bit.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2YES!!! A Firefly/Serenity story on DIGG!!! That's something you just NEVER see!
- Cyberdactyl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Bet the author plays the lottery (a tax for people who are bad at math)"
LOL I occasionally play the Lotto-South lottery. I look at it as an ultra insane high risk investment. If it pays off say high to season 2 ;-) - neenor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0sorry I meant galaxy not universe but you should get the gist.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is