October 04, 2005
Take My Love, Take My Land
Let’s take a quick break from discussing babies and parenting and address something a little more fundamental to this medium. This is a weblog, after all, and while it can be an excellent way to communicate to family, friends, and perfect strangers (Balki Bartokomous, why do you never comment?), it has an ecological niche, an essential instinct, a central purpose held in common with all weblogs everywhere: to convey controversial opinions about science fiction.
So, to slake our ‘blog’s thirst for geekiness, allow me to say that I think Joss Whedon’s Serenity is the greatest science fiction film of the 21st century.
Yep. I said it. Bring on ye haters, ye doubters, ye people who know more about skiffy than I do, Aimee and I went to see it yesterday and really enjoyed it.
CAVEAT: We’re fans of the brief and quickly canceled television series Firefly from which Serenity sprang. I’ve tried to think about how the film would be to someone not already familiar with the characters, setting, and general plotline, and for what it’s worth, I still think that the film, stand-alone, outranks anything the past five years has to offer.
To be clear, I’m cheating a little bit by assigning your Harry Potters and Hobbits and so forth into a separate genre called “Fantasy”, and I’m lumping your Superhero movies into either “Action” or “Superhero.” Also, to further undercut my own authority, there are several prominent science fiction films that I haven’t actually seen. To wit: The Cell (2000), Equilibrium (2002), The Chronicles of Riddick (2004), Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), Solaris (2002), War of the Worlds (2005) , and a whole bunch of foreign films that might qualify. Now, whittling away those that I’ve conveniently classified as non-Science Fiction, those that I haven’t seen, and those that obviously aren’t as good by any measure, here are the movies that might be almost as good as Serentiy but obviously aren’t:
Pitch Black (2000)
Donnie Darko (2001)
A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (2001)
Signs (2002)
Minority Report (2002)
Yes, you are worth something, you runners up. I extend to you the official Toads in-the Hole Pat on the Back. Well done.
I suppose I ought to get to why I liked Serenity so much. While it was a fine chase-movie, combining good spectacle, characters that you come to identify with and/or care for (both on the side of the good guys and the bad guys), moments of suspense, and the usual science fiction Big Idea (established in the very first scene and carried through nearly every subsequent scene: Technological advancements will never enable human civilization to completely refine and control its own desire for freedom), the real reason Serenity is the best science fiction film of the 21st century is that quality that sets it apart from the five also-rans listed above: its sense of humor. Those of you familiar with Joss Whedon’s work will be well-prepared for the usual quips and banter, and in no other genre are they as necessary to keep energy, pace, and a sense of fun alive than in science fiction. Science Fiction tends to sacrifice a great deal to serve whatever Big Idea (Robots are like humans, Reality is malleable by technology, Jedi powers can smother Natalie Portman’s talent…) is being explored by the creator, often leaving believable characters, interesting dialogue, and efficient plotting by the wayside to establish its theme. The first thing that usually goes out the airlock, however, is humor.
Now, there’s a large elephant in the room I’d better address (and no, it’s not the lamentable Star Wars prequels. I cannot heap enough scorn upon those terrible terrible movies. A common response to some disgruntled consumer’s criticism is “Well, I’d like to see you do better!” And the example of Star Wars: Episodes I-III is one situation wherein, given, say, half of George Lucas’ resources, I think I could do better.): The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (2005). Here’s a film that actively serves a Big Idea (Technology can’t give you the answers if you don’t understand what questions to ask. Or, be careful what you say in front of mice.), has some pretty good characters, a fair amount of action, excellent puppets, and an obvious sense of humor. I’m not sure how to defend my opinion in the face of Hitchhiker’s, which is why it’s fortunate that I can put it in an entirely different category: 1980s British Radio Comedy Adaptations.
Posted by Joel at October 4, 2005 10:50 PMThank you Mirons!! When I came out of the theater with Andy on Saturday I told him, "I'm trying to think of a sci-fi movie in recent memory that was better than that, and I'm coming up none." I'm glad to hear we're not the only ones with such a high opinion of the film. It really was THAT good. I loved every minute of it, and I'm hoping that Joss will find some way to bring back these beloved characters.
As for the other movies you listed, I'm all for claiming they're not 100% science fiction. Pitch Black, horror/suspense. Donnie Darko, fantasy/drama. Signs, horror/suspense. I would call AI and Minority Report scifi, but I don't think they're better than Serenity. And Hitchhiker's Guide is more along the lines of what I call a silly sci-fi. Don't get me wrong, I like the movie, but I think it is more comedy than serious science-fiction. I compare it to movies like Galaxy Quest or Space Balls.
Ahhh... bring up Serenity and I'll rant on and on and on...
Posted by: Matt at October 5, 2005 08:09 PMSeeger and I are going to see Serenity sometime this week. You should see Eternal Sunshine... pretty soon. It is a great movie. Also, alot of people put The Cell in the "Thriller" genre so you can take that one of your not-seen list. If you want. I liked Pitch Black and Minority report and liked both of them.
Posted by: Nate at October 5, 2005 08:12 PMSadly, I have yet to see either Serenity or Hitchhiker's, though the "1980's British Radio Comedy Adaptations" category does appeal to me. Offhand, do you guys know Camber Carpenter? She's a friend of a friend who goes to SDSU who said that she knew you folks. Hm, very well.
Posted by: Randy at October 5, 2005 11:12 PMYou and Matt removed the words from my lips.
Serenity is bliss.
Oh... had I the money to see it again.
I loved that gorram movie.
Posted by: Andy at October 6, 2005 12:09 AMI'm kind of curious for you guys who have seen Serenity: Were you fans of the television series Firefly? Or Buffy?
I'm kind of interested to hear people's opinions of the film who have NOT seen the series ... I wondered if there were any jokes or characterizations or anything that they felt left out on ...
Posted by: Aimee at October 7, 2005 12:26 PMAimee,
I wondered the same thing. I was a fan of Firefly along with Buffy and Angel. I imagine anyone who enjoys sci-fi flicks would enjoy this one a lot, but it is hard to tell when you're a fan of the show. I know Joss said that he really tried to make it for the general population and tried not to include things that only the Firefly fans would understand. But it has gotten some pretty good reviews. Hopefully with word of mouth it will stay in the box office top 5 for a good while.
Posted by: Matt at October 7, 2005 02:29 PMAllow me — a non-Whedonite — to briefly join the discussion. As I've mentioned to Joel, my only exposure to Whedon is a couple of random episodes of Buffy (which didn't impress me) and a few issues of Astonishing X-Men (which showed promise but were marred by lame dialogue). Firefly has been in my Netflix queue for a while, but has never made it to the top.
Until now.
I just found this (legal) video preview of the first few minutes of the film, and I'm impressed. I'm intrigued. The world that I've been shown in those first few minutes looks fun and exciting and, most importantly, science fictiony. I like science fictiony.
My question: would watching Serenity spoil the series? Should I watch the series first?
Posted by: J.D. Roth at October 7, 2005 02:37 PMWould watching Serenity spoil the series? That's a good question. I think that there are some episodes that would be marred by knowing that Character X survives or Catastrophe Y doesn't happen, but I think most of us go into a television program assuming that everything will work out okay by the end. The first couple of episodes might lose some of their mystery as you'll already be familiar with the characters and some of their raison d'etre.
Posted by: Joel at October 8, 2005 06:44 AMJd, I think that it would be interesting for me if you saw Serenity without having seen the television series, so that you might be an unbiased perspective in a discussion about the film's merits/de-merits.
Personally, I loved the series, and I felt like this film was a sort of Summing-Up-of-a-Potentially-Brilliant television series on the silver screen for me. It was fun to wait a year (ie., we watched the series courtesy of Netflix last fall) in anticipation of the film to see the familiar faces, sets, and situations again. That said, I think that for you, Jd, all of our trumpeting about the greatness of the show may ruin the film for you ... Of course, I trust that you'll be able to successfully set aside all our opinions and praise while you watch the film, but it might just be buzzing around in your subconscious anyway ... That said, I just told my sister to watch the series before going to see the film.
What Matt said about the success of the show has me thinking again: If the show were truly successful (like billions at the Box Office), do you think that Joss Whedon would do a sequel to Serenity or try to go back to the television medium and revive Firefly? Is it too late for TV?
Posted by: Aimee at October 8, 2005 07:45 AM
I think I've heard several cast memebers say that they wouldn't want to do the show on television in the same capacity. Ideally, they'd like to do two more films, but the audience has to be there. As much as I would LIKE to see what happens next as OFTEN as possible, I agree that a film series would be the way to go. There is so much more than can be done in film as opposed to TV, blood and foul language HIGH on the list!
Posted by: Andy at October 8, 2005 10:23 AMWell, they got around the foul language thing by cursing in Chinese. Which is a whole different topic: When does the FCC allow you to curse in foreign languages? For instance, I'm fairly sure you can't swear in Spanish on the networks, and as far as I know German is out. I wonder if they have some kind of matrix of % of population that speaks said language vs. degree of swearing permitted.
Posted by: Joel at October 8, 2005 02:57 PM