RoR: Forum

WebWarlock wrote:

"It seems that the fans of FireFly don’t want to give credit to the Nielsen ratings system because it is that system that spelled doom for their show....

So since the FireFly fans seem to pride themselves on their intelligence, I post this.

What better idea do you have to measure the success of a television show?

Cause I gotta tell you, I a[m] waiting to hear this one."

Well, of course there are other ways to measure the success of a show other than Nielsens. How MUCH a show is loved can be important too.

The original Star Trek performed badly enough to be cancelled. To this day it still cannot launch a show on any of the "Big Four", due to low ratings. To say that the original shows and subsequent followers are not successes would of course be lunacy. The franchise hauls in huge amounts of cash because people loved the show enough to go to the movies, buy VHS & DVD sets of the shows, watch the re-runs shown on TV time and time again, buy computer products & action figures & Vulcan rubber ear tips, etc. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is in the same boat, able to get its loyal following to watch its re-runs twice a day on FX, and buy its DVD sets and computer games, despite having ratings much lower than presumably more "successful" shows on the networks.

"The Simpsons", "24", "The Sopranos", and many others all make more money for themselves and their networks as compared to high ratings shows such as "Good Morning Miami" and "Still Standing", or even non "time-slot hit" shows like "Crossing Jordan" and "The District". Nobody LOVES those shows and will not spend anything more than the time it takes to watch them.

That having been said, I love Firefly, I think it was easily the best new show of the season, and I hope it finds a home somewhere, for my own sake at least. But I can't really blame Fox for cancelling it. The ratings were just too low :)

IY

Post 61

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 5:28pm

Allyson said: "My source is Tim Minear. I would think your reliable sources pale in comparision, and I can name mine."

To which I say - Oh yes, because we all know that the people at Mutant Enemy never lie.

But on to a more substantial topic.

After congratulating me on my book deal (thanks!) Joy said: "Whether or not Joss did whatever, I'm concerned about the implicit responsibility assigned to Joss/others for the feelings of the viewing public. Joss et al can not be responsible for the vulnerability of others! If someone gets too attached to a fictional character, that isn't Joss's problem it is the problem of the viewer. It is a viewer's responsibility to himself to be aware of the difference between reality and fantasy."

There's a famous story in Star Trek fandom, having to do with Nichelle Nichols and her desire to leave the series after its first season. She was talked into staying by none other than Dr. Martin Luther King, who told her that even if she never did anything but sit there on the set, her presence as a black woman working side-by-side in the future with people of other races, was an inspiration to the black community of the 1960s.

(I actually had the honor of seeing Ms. Nichols at the recent LA Science Fiction Convention and hearing her tell the story herself. You can hear my recording of it by clicking here.)

Now, imagine that Gene Roddenberry heard about this discussion between Nichelle and Dr. King, and he then started featuring Uhura more prominently and more sympathetically on the show. Suppose Gene gave interviews where he said, "I have no plans to send Uhura anywhere. Nichelle Nichols is a big part of the heart of the show." Suppose that Gene then made an episode at the end of the season where the starship Enterprise visited Klan World. Suppose Uhura beamed down to Klan World and was immediately seized by an angry mob shouting "Get the nigger! Get the nigger!" and the episode ended with her dead body swinging from a rope tied to a tree branch. Suppose then that Gene Roddenberry addressed his public and said, "I didn't care about Uhura being black when I introduced her and I didn't care about her being black when I killed her. To me, the idea that I couldn't kill her because she was black is just as offensive as the idea that I killed her for being black."

Now, what would you have expected the black community and the civil rights movement as a whole to do under those circumstances? Well, what I've described is pretty much what Joss Whedon did to Tara. Do you really want to blame the lesbian community and the gay rights movement for the fact that they're upset?

I've done a lot of thinking and writing in the past few months about the issue of creative freedom vs. creative responsibility. Works of fiction have an incredible ability to affect the real world. Just ask Abraham Lincoln, who referred to Harriet Beecher Stowe as "the little woman who wrote the little book that started this great big war." When you have that kind of power at your command, you must use it responsibly. In my opinion, Joss Whedon didn't.

Now, back to Firefly. I disagree with WW - I don't think Tara's death alone was what doomed Firefly. I don't even think Tara's death alone was what reduced Buffy to a bad parody of what it once was. But there is a link between what happened on Buffy and what happened on Firefly, and the link is Joss Whedon himself.

When Buffy first appeared on the air, the press concentrated on Sarah Michelle Gellar, the star of the show. When Angel first appeared, the press concentrated on David Boreanaz. But who did the press concentrate on when Firefly premiered? The guy who plays Mal? I can't even remember the actor's name, let alone remember seeing an interview with him. No, Firefly was promoted as Joss Whedon's Firefly. In effect, Joss himself was the star - and that brought questions about his character and his past into the equation.

Was Joss Whedon's past behavior the only reason Firefly was cancelled? No - as has been stated, there was also the boycott from Dark Angel fans angered by Gail Berman's display of nepotism, and the fact that many viewers who tuned in simply didn't like what they saw. But as long as Joss was the center of attention, the darker aspects of his character and his past were there every bit as much as his writing ability and the star power of his name. You can't separate the two - the bad always comes with the good.

So in answer to your question, "What would have happened if Firefly had been marketed by some total unknown???" - I can tell you right now that the show would have had at least one more viewer. Me. What I saw in the original pilot was good enough that I would have stuck with the show, except for one thing. I couldn't trust Joss Whedon. I couldn't give him my attention and my emotional involvement again, because of what he had done with it before. How many other people do you think there are out there who would say the same thing?

Post 62

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 5:56pm

Black skin is completely irrelevant. Substract the word "black" from your diatribe and you are left with nothing. Because you just said nothing.

Post 63

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 7:15pm

Joy,

Without a doubt, that was a truly repugnant, insipid, and intellectually devoid piece of claptrap. I'd like to take this opportunity to dissect some of your finer points.

Let's start with, "It is the name of a quietly popular television show"

Quietly popular? What does that term mean, anyway? Let's drop the spin. Quietly popular is a euphamism for "dismally rated", because only syncophantic Jossophiles (like yourself) can stand this cliched mess of a program.

And, your inimitable, "Like the firefly, Firefly is a refreshing, delightful and quite unique offering in a vast sea of otherwise dismal television programming and cinema fare."

Well, let's start with, 'Like the firefly'. Are fireflies refreshing, Ranger Rick? What other qualities does the insect have that correlate to television or cinema fare? They both have lights? Is that all it takes to satisfy you, a few flashing lights here or there with only a gram or so of substance?

Moving along, and bear in mind, we have, "and a passionate cast of nine"

A passionate cast. Ok, so we aren't too familiar with the thesaurus function yet, that's alright, sparky. Better luck next time. Also, since we have a cast of nine and a show that ended its run after 11 episodes, I'm sure they're all fully developed, right?

I think my jaw slammed into my keyboard when I came across, "I find myself quoting many of lines to my husband, who can quote back even more lines from each episode that has aired."

Now, I'm not suggesting you're a deceitful imbecile, far from it. I do, indeed, take this statement at face value, with the notation that if I were ever to send someone an email with a Firefly quotation in my email sig to a friend, they'd have me carted away.

What is so refreshing about this show is that unlike other popular science fiction shows, this show is about people.

As opposed to the plethora of television shows out there that aren't about people? Quit watching TeleTubbies; there's a whole dial full of quality programming about people.

"As history has shown again and again, some people just don't like to be bossed around."

You come up with that deduction all by yourself, Sherlock? I stand in awe of your insight into social relations. /golfclap

"demanding a level of consciousness"

Easy on the pseudo-intellectual jargon there, sparky. Someone like me might ask you just what level of consciousness is required. Will a six do? Six of one, half a dozen of the other?

"I won't give away what Reavers are, but they are the stuff on nightmares -- creatures that cannot be reasoned with."

I'm sure the Native Americans were really appreciative of that one; or did you not pick up on the subtle-as-a-tackhammer allegories?

"Nine unique individuals"

As opposed to...nine identical individuals? Quit padding your word count.

"I think the credit for these characters are a blend of excellent concept and writing, and incredibly dedicated actors/actresses who are passionate about their work."

Welcome to several paragraphs ago; and incidentally, that passionate Mk II remark is starting to scare me.

"[Mal] is truly an Individual in the highest sense of the word."

As opposed to what, exactly? An individual in the lowest sense of the word? An identical twin? That is a meaningless phrase.

And last, but certainly not least, "I hope that Joss Whedon will find a home for Firefly as Fox has decided not to continue it."

Decided not to continue it...Sorry, chief, the show was cancelled because the ratings were horrific and FOX was tired of being mocked for pouring money into this sewer. Spin it all you want, but they could have got better ratings with a test pattern, and for a markedly reduced cost.

Sorry, Joy, but your favorite show is dead. Boo hoo. Send my condolences to your husband regarding your email sigs.

Partisan

~It's not just a name, it's a state of mind~

Post 64

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 7:40pm

Quote: "Well, of course there are other ways to measure the success of a show other than Nielsens. How MUCH a show is loved can be important too."

Sorry. Love doesn't pay the bills. Unless you are working Lower Wacker in Chicago.

How do you propose we measure "love"?

Just as a point of reference. "The Nutty Professor" on Fox friday night still got a 4.0/7 rating.

That ties with FF's highest ever, the first episode.

Now that is comedy.

Warlock

Post 65

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 7:51pm

Hello there Partisan, and yes, your name fits your personality perfectly and you have amply demonstrated your state of mind -- from a dictionary: Partisan: One exhibiting blind, prejudiced and unreasoning allegiance. Well done!

It really is a shame that there are so many sad and dysfunctional individuals on the Internet. Of course, they are just as sad and dysfunctional in real life, but easier to ignore and avoid.

I'm puzzled why a select few individuals seem to believe that condescension, ignorance, non-sequiturs, insults and trivia combined in various arrangements comprise discussion, much less intelligent discussion. Perhaps because they tend to have a parrots knowledge of 4 and 5 syllable words?

But then, I'm wasting my time replying as they are also notoriously lacking in reading comprehension.

I hope you enjoy your state of mind. It's rather ugly from this perspective.

Joy :), It's not just a name, it's a state of mind. LOL!

Post 66

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 7:57pm

Oh, and double shame on you Partisan for stating that Native Americans were unreasoning creatures like the Reavers! You really are an equal opportunity bigot!

Sheesh!

Joy :)

Post 67

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 8:21pm

These Firefly bashers need to lose the 'tude, dude. If you don't like the show, it's no reason to have a spaz attack.

Pantalaimon

Post 68

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 8:24pm

Hi Joy and BBovenguy - just want to say thank you for sharing your very interesting, and I might add polite debate.
It's fun to follow - and I can only say I wish other boards and posters would follow your lead when it comes to civil and intelligent debate.
Thanks!

Post 69

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 8:27pm

Joy-
Well, I am JUST a Native American, and I take offense to this: "Oh, and double shame on you Partisan for stating that Native Americans were unreasoning creatures like the Reavers! You really are an equal opportunity bigot!"

Partisan didn't make THIS connection... Joss Whedon did. It was widely reported that the reavers were based on Native Americans of the old west. Herc reported this little gem months ago. That was yet another reason I boycotted FF.

Are you going to call Whedon "an equal opportunity bigot" for coming up with that metaphor?

No?

Well, I will. WHEDON'S presenting Reavers as Native Americans is bigoted.
LS

Post 70

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 8:28pm

My dictionary of synonyms lists the following for partisan;supporter,promoter,advocate,defender,upholder,protector ,sustainer.Not such a bad thing to be. Joss Whedon is the one who said the reavers were based on Native Americans. In the show the reavers were described as cannibals who raped women to the point of death. The treatment of female characters during Buffy's sixth season is a big part of how they lost a huge chunk of their audience.I don't think the two sides here are ever going to agree on the relative merits of Firefly.But it's certainly an interesting discussion.

Post 71

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 9:02pm

It is odd how rumors get started and take a life of their own. I'll let you all decide.

The link to Herc's report is here

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=12954

(which, BTW, is a summary of an interview published in SciFi Mag which can be found here: http://www.scifi.com/scifimag/october2002/transcripts/index4.html):

What is quoted is this:
* “On the other side he has mindless savages called Reavers, which are a lot less complicated. You see them and you run. They're not monsters. What they are, are people who went out into space, saw the extraordinary nothingness and went completely out of their heads. They've become cannibalistic marauding savages. They're kind of like the Comanche in the old movies except without playing it as a racial thing at all, or even a cultural thing.”

Read it carefully, for Josh never says they are based on any Native American tribe. He states that they fill a role like the Comanche did in old movies.

That is not the same as saying reavers=Native Americans.

Post 72

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 9:10pm

The defination of Partisan from http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary is:

a firm adherent to a party , faction, cause, or person; especially : one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance

Check out this from http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entries/87/p0088700.html

1. A fervent, sometimes militant supporter or proponent of a party, cause, faction, person, or idea.

Seems like the troll chose his name wisely, but little else in his comments seems to be rooted in reality.

Post 73

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 9:26pm

For those who are confused, BBOVenGuy and Buck Toronto are not the same person. However, Buck Toronto and Web Warlock are the same person. Web Warlock has been trying to get some "Dark Angel" fans to post here about how much they hate Joss, but so far I don't see a big turn-out.

Just so you know, BBOvenGuy and Web Warlock belong to a fan group called "The Kittens" which is devoted to the idea of Willow and Tara being together FOREVER. They're upset (all two of them, as far as this board is concerned) that Joss Whedon killed off Tara and didn't show the proper respect to the character or the actress who portrayed her, Amber Benson. So they hate Joss, and they hate his shows and they hate the idea that he might sit at home and count his money and create new shows and in general not care that they're in pain over this fictional couple.

For me, I'm with Allyson. Joss didn't pitch "Firefly" to SciFi, according to a friend of mine who works on the show. He pitched it to UPN. If UPN says no, then I guess Joss will just have to make another show and move on.

Moving on. What a concept.

Post 74

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 9:41pm

Thank you, Lurking, I'm glad that someone picked up on that, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. And I'll second your notion of calling Joss a bigot.

Post 75

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 10:03pm

Yup.

Just a handful of us, and half of them are me, the other half might be me as well. I am all of them. Don't mind the politically influential population over there. No that drop in ratings was always there. Besides ratings are not important to Geniuses. They have love on their side.

Nice quoting of the October AICN post by the way. Gave them plenty of time to clean up their act. Considering September 28th is Native American day you can bet they were emailed.

Here is Herc’s original September 27 posting for FF 1.4

Do we see what a Reaver looks like?
No. The Reavers, said to be modelled upon the Old West’s more bloodthirsty Native American tribes, remain phantoms in “Firefly.” They remained on their ship in “Serenity” and they remain offscreen in “Bushwacked” as well.

Now. Are they talking about actual Native Americans or Hollywood style “Indians”? Who knows. Who cares. One more time Joss opened his mouth and inserted his foot. Ok, granted it is Herc saying this, but Herc has been the mouthpiece for Camp ME for a long time.

Hell, if it interested me at all, I might even be able to get a script page with comments on it. But it really doesn’t.

Besides this show is dead and I am moving on.

Warlock

Post 76

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 10:09pm

Sorry typo.
October SciFi.

Again, my level of not really caring.

Warlock

Post 77

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 10:31pm

Pick a side, Web. Are you all mighty, influential and show-killing, or are you part of a put-upon minority that Joss Whedon needs to protect and serve? Why don't you tell these fine folks how you know real live Neilsen families, and have influenced their viewing habits? Go on. I'd love to read those stories again. Don't underestimate yourself, dude. You wield some serious power.

Friends of mine (and myself included) quit watching "Buffy" last year because we thought it sucked. Killing Tara was just the capper to a spectacularly bad year. DMW didn't work, plain and simple. This year isn't much better. But a lot of the reason for that misdirection is the fact that Marti Noxon is in charge. Hate to diss a sister, but she just isn't cutting it. I miss the snap and fire of Joss that was so prevalent in the episodes of "Firefly" that I saw. That was the man at his best. A terrific show.

So I'm looking forward to seeing it on UPN. Or failing that, I'll watch whatever he does next. Maybe Buffy will get good again. Whatever. They're just television shows.

Post 78

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 11:43pm

Wow, there is some serious sock puppeting going on here... "Hi, my name is blahblahblah, and I'm going to see how many people I can try to piss off over a television show." (Same person, five minutes later... "Hi, my name is blahblahblahnumbertwo, and I agree wholeheartedly with blahblahblah. *Insert insult here*" I've been coming to solohq for a while, and this is the first time I have seen serious trolling. I guess it had to happen eventually. Sorry they killed your thread, Joy. The men in white hats heard you either way. ;-)

Post 79

Saturday, January 4, 2003 - 11:54pm