Messages

S P O I L E R S

What was it meant to be?  A bookend to the series, or a jumping off point for more movies?  It seemed to be trying to be both at the same time.  On the one hand, major characters are offed for no particular resonance (except for people who watched the series) and the fledgling romance of the doctor and the mechanic is brought to fruition.  That points to an ending.  The open-ended climax suggest that more is on the way.

In the series, I got the sense that the crew were small fish in a big pond.  In the movie, they're crucial to galaxy-altering events.

Mal's relationship with the preacher has totally changed.  Mal never really respected his opinion in the series and treated him with some amount of disregard and suspicion, but in the movie the preacher is his moral compass.

Also, it's not clear whether anything at all has been achieved by the sacrifices made.

Wasn't River, standing there, post-combat, blood dripping from her Klingon-bladed weaponry, just a bit Buffy?

Don't get me wrong - there was tons about it that I did enjoy.  Everything I didn't mention, I suppose.

I've just seen it.  This post contains no spoilers.

Uhm...sometimes I wish I could remove all knowledge of something (in this case, the Firefly series) from my brain so I can get a fresh perspective when watching something in a new medium.

As a Firefly fan, it annoyed me as much as I enjoyed it.  The big screen is not necessary.

I can't disagree with your opinion of Empire magazine, Watcher.  I too am often dismayed by what seems to be a swing in the direction of fawning support of the films that have the most money to splash around.

However, Empire (for me) still has a history of generally good and impartial reviewing behind it.

As for Serenity, I loved the Firefly series, so I'm as biased as all hell about the movie.

You're wrong about the Star Wars prequels all getting 5 stars.  It actually went 4/5/4.

The rating system is odd, as 1 to 4 stars is the range of quality.  (Poor through excellent, IIRC.)  5 stars is reserved as "unmissable" - a cinema event which you, the punter, must attend for (if not the high quality of the movie) more esoteric reasons.  Independance Day and Jurassic Park are examples of 5-star event movies that don't say much for quality dialogue or depth of subject matter.

I don't feel much like supporting Empire this month, though.  They've included a Star Wars supplment which refers to the original trilogy as "the second trilogy" and makes out that the two are somehow connected.  Years ago I realised that Lucas has absolutely no idea what the original trilogy is about.

archangel:  it is the film (sort of sequel) to the short-lived Firefly series.  There is sci-fi in the movie (and the series, part of the time) but the review rightly describes it as a "complex mix of Western, sci-fi, thriller and comedy".

As for it being a glorified two-parter, the review indicates that for the first half it does seem close to an extended episode of a TV series but then cuts loose around the halfway point (in which the slow pacing of the first half bears fruit).

Amstor, I'm not sure if it's for you (from what you've said) but here's the summary from Empire:

"If you're a novice, this is a plucky introduction to Whedon's world and the most fun sci-fi of the year.  If you're a devotee, this is the magnificent return you've been praying for."

...got 4 stars in Empire this month.

Whoop!

I just keep mine blue-tacked to the bathroom wall.  I scrape the mildew off with my toothbrush.

New Labour should not be in power anymore, frankly.

You only have to watch one episode of Question Time to see what they've become.

The health secretary, Patricia Hewitt (sp?) was on lastnight and was questioned about the incident at the conference.

After offering the dismissive party line of "we've apologised, it was unfortunate, let's move on" she then went on to defend the stewards.  She mentioned terrorism and the Brighton bomb as justification for forcibly removing a pensioner who had loudly proclaimed the word "rubbish".  

Quite where the link between a gentle heckle and a bomb is, I can't for the life of me imagine, but she managed to quite merrily doublespeak her way to a direct connection.

That's what people are voting for when they vote for Labour these days:  the defence of the indefensible.

Not only was the pensioner (who spoke out during Jack Straw's speech at the Labour Party conference) manhandled out of the auditorium by several heavy-handed stewards, but he was also then questioned by police under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.

Innocent man shot in the London Underground.  The Prevention of Terrorism Act used to question a heckler.

What next?

Dreaming about bush.

Snarf.  Fnarr.

"The number of bicycles in Beijing has continued to increase over the past few years, reaching 10 million by the end of last year."

(China Daily November 20, 2002)


"Number of bicycles: 8 million"

(Beijing Fact Sheet, 2005)


"Estimates of the number of bicycles in the city range from 4 million to 10 million."

(Jonathan Watts in Beijing, The Gruniad, 2005)
 

I say we invade China, surround Beijing with an impenetrable force-field and go in there and count the bicycles.

It's the only way to be sure.

Of the 14,560,000 people in Beijing, there must be a quantity that are either too old, too young or unable to use a bicycle.

There would further be those that do not use a bicycle.  They may have a car instead, for example.

Plus, we are not taking into account bicycles that may be in storage, or bicycle production industries.

Indeed, each example in the song is prefaced with "Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?"

Perhaps this is an instruction for us to come to our own conclusions about the acceptability of each example.

or == of

And does Alanis Morrisette (sp?) understand the meaning or irony?