LeviF Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 This is just a rumor, so don't shoot the messenger...but apparently Whedon put the Firefly ship somewhere in the Avengers film and there are people who have reported seeing it. Second, Whedon has apparently also been on record RECENTLY indicating he's hopeful that the Firefly series will get a 2nd chance at life, with the possible suitor being, of all things, Netflix. Apparently Netflix is interested in picking up shows that died a premature death and producing them. I don't have a source for this, this is all just speculation and rumor...but I thought it was interesting for those who love the Firefly/Serenity universe. Netflix has been talking about doing that sort of thing lately. I'm going to see The Avengers again, so I'll be looking for those types of little things that I always miss the first time around.
shrader Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 This is just a rumor, so don't shoot the messenger...but apparently Whedon put the Firefly ship somewhere in the Avengers film and there are people who have reported seeing it. Second, Whedon has apparently also been on record RECENTLY indicating he's hopeful that the Firefly series will get a 2nd chance at life, with the possible suitor being, of all things, Netflix. Apparently Netflix is interested in picking up shows that died a premature death and producing them. I don't have a source for this, this is all just speculation and rumor...but I thought it was interesting for those who love the Firefly/Serenity universe. Isn't Castle a pretty successful show right now? They'd have a hard time doing Firefly without the main character.
ajzepp Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 Isn't Castle a pretty successful show right now? They'd have a hard time doing Firefly without the main character. Never seen it, to be honest. Can't do Firefly w/out Mal, though, that's for sure Netflix has been talking about doing that sort of thing lately. I'm going to see The Avengers again, so I'll be looking for those types of little things that I always miss the first time around. There's been a significant amount of word of mouth and grass roots Firefly/Serenity stuff going on since the film...I would imagine there is more of a fan base there to tap into than they realize. If you see the ship, let us know!
CosmicBills Posted May 8, 2012 Posted May 8, 2012 What's real sad is seeing how little money such a good movie made on opening weekend. Piracy is really killing the movie industry, no one is going to see movies anymore. Not sure how their going to pay for any other movies after this flop... You're mistaken. Piracy is not a threat to a movie like the Avengers for numerous reasons. First, it's designed to be seen on the big screen, so even if you have the option to see it illegally, most would prefer to see it on the big screen as the good lord intended. Second, they released it in Europe almost 3 weeks early, cutting a huge chunk of the piracy market out of the picture early. This has become the standard for opening big movies now: Europe and Asia first, the US second. The threat of piracy isn't found in threatening the profitability of giant tent-pole event movies like the Avengers. Instead it threatens diversity in the cinema. It's the 20 million and under movies that get hurt the most which makes studio's and exhibitors less inclined to release these sorts of films. Classic films without a built in audience wouldn't get a release today because of Piracy, films like The Godfather (I and II), Mean Streets, Midnight Cowboy, Alien, etc. etc. So you can keep acting like pirating movies doesn't hurt anyone, but it does. It's forcing Hollywood to take less risks, make fewer movies and bloat the marketplace with utter shite. Sure, occasionally one of the big tent-poles does it right but for every Dark Knight and Avengers you have 20 Transformer 3s and Battleships.
shrader Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 So you can keep acting like pirating movies doesn't hurt anyone, but it does. It's forcing Hollywood to take less risks, make fewer movies and bloat the marketplace with utter shite. Sure, occasionally one of the big tent-poles does it right but for every Dark Knight and Avengers you have 20 Transformer 3s and Battleships. Battleship is the studio playing it safe? That was the time I have ever seen an entire theater audience collectively laugh at a trailer for a non-comedy movie.
apuszczalowski Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Battleship is the studio playing it safe? That was the time I have ever seen an entire theater audience collectively laugh at a trailer for a non-comedy movie. I have a feeling it is going to be the odds on favorite to sweep the razzies this year and is going to be talked about as one of the bigger box office bombs. Its probably going to end up being this years "Cowboys vs. Aliens"
DrDawkinstein Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 lol greg, the last time we had this discussion, you argued that piracy hurts the small films because the large ones dont make their money back, and therefore the studios dont have the funds to invest in the small films. now its that piracy doesnt really hurt the big films, it just scares the studios away from the small films. there always seems to be a convenient excuse as to why the studios only push the shlock instead of the art. the reality is, they arent really in it for the films, just the $. Hollywood has been taking less risks long before the internet piracy threat. im sure when Battleship bombs, they'll say it would have made more money if it wasnt for piracy but now that they lost so much on a pile of crap, they wont be able to fund smaller films. and that's all piracy's fault, right? their business model is a mess, as are their business choices. that hurts the studios more than piracy. that's really what it comes down to.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 lol greg, the last time we had this discussion, you argued that piracy hurts the small films because the large ones dont make their money back, and therefore the studios dont have the funds to invest in the small films. now its that piracy doesnt really hurt the big films, it just scares the studios away from the small films. there always seems to be a convenient excuse as to why the studios only push the shlock instead of the art. the reality is, they arent really in it for the films, just the $. Hollywood has been taking less risks long before the internet piracy threat. im sure when Battleship bombs, they'll say it would have made more money if it wasnt for piracy but now that they lost so much on a pile of crap, they wont be able to fund smaller films. and that's all piracy's fault, right? their business model is a mess, as are their business choices. that hurts the studios more than piracy. that's really what it comes down to. Keep in mind, there's an entire world of independent film where the dollars and cents are less of a priority. A world where lead actors don't get paid $10 million just to show up.
DrDawkinstein Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 Keep in mind, there's an entire world of independent film where the dollars and cents are less of a priority. A world where lead actors don't get paid $10 million just to show up. yep, I began to touch on that in my last discussion with greg. I stated that the Internet will help the independents move away from Studios and still make money (or even more money). The middle-man (studios) will no longer be needed as people can distribute their film to the entire world instantly. But I was told that the studios arent middlemen, they actually make the films. Kind of insulting to the writers, directors, actors, editors, grips, etc. if you ask me... but greg knows the biz.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) yep, I began to touch on that in my last discussion with greg. I stated that the Internet will help the independents move away from Studios and still make money (or even more money). The middle-man (studios) will no longer be needed as people can distribute their film to the entire world instantly. But I was told that the studios arent middlemen, they actually make the films. Kind of insulting to the writers, directors, actors, editors, grips, etc. if you ask me... but greg knows the biz. I won't pretend to know the industry well enough to offer my opinion on the studios' specific role in the process. My biggest beef with Hollywood and the studios is just the incessant pre-packaging. Oh boy, Jim Carrey making silly faces! Kevin James is a goofball, yaaayyy! Now watch Liam Neeson kick peoples' asses. And as much as I love most of the superhero movies, it's becoming rarer and rarer to see a hit movie that doesn't involve a secure pre-sold source material. Edited May 9, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine
DrDawkinstein Posted May 9, 2012 Posted May 9, 2012 (edited) Agreed. And I mean no offense to tgreg. My beef isnt with him, nor do I back the stealing of property. I, personally, do not download movies. But I digress... Avengers, great flick, go see it! Edited May 9, 2012 by DrDareustein
Mark Vader Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 I enjoyed the movie but did not think it was great due to one main reason - weak script. I am willing to give Whedon the benefit of doubt and think he melllowed the story to accommodate the various individual plot lines running in parallel. That way it makes the movie more accessible to the average watcher. A strategy which has obviously worked considering the worldwide box office take. Jay has already told you about your question, but here are more details. My major complaint was that much of the third act resembles the Transformers 3 plot line. Alien armies coming to earth, using a portal, snake-like mechanical creatures destroying everything in their path. The only difference is that instead of autobots, it is superheroes protecting the earth. I'll agree with you on the payoff of the third act, that it was not very inventive, but I would not say that "The Avengers" had a weak script.
Fan in Chicago Posted May 10, 2012 Posted May 10, 2012 I'll agree with you on the payoff of the third act, that it was not very inventive, but I would not say that "The Avengers" had a weak script. My comment wasn't meant to take away the fact that it is a very good film (not that you implied I did). I just thought that while I would give it an enthusiatic 4 out of 5, a more innovate plot and development would have pushed it over into great territory. Again, IMHO the slight watering down was intentional.
Recommended Posts