[TML] Alternate Firefly review

[Jerry W Barrington]

On 8/10/08 6:42 AM, "Michael Jenkins" <darvedd at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, I'm a Firefly plan, and all I got from the opinion above is that
> they missed the point.
> 
> We all know Joss isn't technical ... he admits it himself.
> 
> If you want lots of "science" in your sci-fi, then Whedon's not your man.
> 
> This is not a surprise to Whedon's fans.
> 
> You want interesting characterisation and dialogue, Whedon's your guy.

Hmm.  I don't have a problem with somebody who "isn't technical" writing
stories.  That's fine.  Just don't call such stories science fiction.
That's like somebody who's bad at choreography doing a bunch of bad
choreography, then saying, "it's alright, their well characterized."

If he's so weak at science, why doesn't he hire technical advisors?  Or
study and get better at science?  Or stick to a field where technical
doesn't matter.

It's entirely possible to have good characterization, dialogue, & plot, AND
good science.  THAT is good SF.

For that matter, just what makes Firefly's characters any more believable
than your standard soap opera?

> If you can't appreciate what he produces, then as far as fans like
> myself are concerned, it's your loss.
> 
> If you don't get it, your opinion isn't going to upset me, because ...
> you just don't get it.

"You just don't get it"...  Generally stated by people not bothering to
actually argue the point, it serves you poorly.

What I do "get" is that SF, by definition, is supposed to include the S ->
Science.  If alleged SF has lots of other stuff done great, the horrible
science still turns me off.

(Just for the record, I was never that thrilled with Buffy either.  And when
you get right down to it, what has he really done besides Buffy/Angel and
Serenity/Firefly?)