Horrible.
SERENITY
By
Victoria Alexander
FilmsInReview.com
My new column, THE DEVIL’S HAMMER, appears every Monday on fromthebalcony.com. The Sept. 26th column features: The Phenomenal Tao Nightclub at Venetian, Vegas Magazine Party at The Palms, George Clooney Infests Invests in Las Vegas, McCormick and Schmidt Seafood Restaurant Renovation, The Da Vinci Code, The Psychic Macaw, A Movie Star’s “Fraud” Marriage, Madonna’s Gay Husband?, and more
This is what happens when you have TV power. Joss Whedon’s TV series “Firefly” had fans (most of them were in the audience at the promotional screening I attended last night) but not enough for the series to continue after only eleven episodes. Nevertheless, Whedon has “juice” (“Buffy, the Vampire Slayer” and its spin-off, “Angel”) and Universal Pictures gave him money to patch together a movie of his maligned baby.
[A comment by my husband applies here: We signed up for a friend’s weeklong biofeedback program. We left after two days. My husband told the director: “How do you tell someone their baby is ugly?”]
SERENITY takes place 500 years in the future. Other solar system planets have been inhabited and the whole shebang is ambitiously controlled by the monolithic Alliance. Science now can program everyone’s thoughts and lives (For those interested, I’d like to recommend Jose M. R. Delgrado’s notorious “Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a Psychocivilized Society.”). All, except rebel Capt. Malcolm "Mal" Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) and the crew of his ship, Serenity.
The ship’s doctor, Simon (Sean Maher), needs help freeing his creepy, catatonic, but powerfully psychic, 17-year-old sister River Tam (Summer Glau), from the Alliance’s grip. Shoeless and dopey, River is the latest model of war-craft: a 90-pound killing machine with extraordinary psychic powers. River is controlled with MK-ULTRA-like commands. It is a very easy rescue but Alliance forces, led by a mysterious gent known as Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor), pursue Serenity across planetary systems. Operative will not die.
If you are not a “cult” fan, the story is simple enough to follow. Fillion, an obvious alterego for Whedon, is given all the sexy close-ups. I liked the personality of the crew, especially the guy who kept – realistically – complaining about the mission to rescue the monosyllabic River. Well, you will be pleased to know that when spooky River is programmed to kill, she finds a pair of SS regulation boots!
The physical laws of strength do not apply here. River is one of those spacey chicks that soon gets annoying. River, for all her importance to the Alliance, is a waif-burden. What I liked about SERENITY? Saying exactly what I liked is a spoiler.
SPOILER ALERT!
The deaths and the hip dialogue. Fillion does not believe in taking prisoners or letting diplomacy mar his agenda. His ex-girlfriend should be dropped off at the nearest planet. The special effects are horrible and Whedon, for all his proclaimed love for his baby, has not realized his universe with the cruel intelligence of, let’s say, BLADE RUNNER.
Victoria Alexander answers your emails and she’s emotionally prepared for the wrath of Firefly/Serenity fans. She can be reached by visiting FilmsInReview.com or, directly, at masauu@aol.com.
By
Victoria Alexander
FilmsInReview.com
My new column, THE DEVIL’S HAMMER, appears every Monday on fromthebalcony.com. The Sept. 26th column features: The Phenomenal Tao Nightclub at Venetian, Vegas Magazine Party at The Palms, George Clooney Infests Invests in Las Vegas, McCormick and Schmidt Seafood Restaurant Renovation, The Da Vinci Code, The Psychic Macaw, A Movie Star’s “Fraud” Marriage, Madonna’s Gay Husband?, and more
This is what happens when you have TV power. Joss Whedon’s TV series “Firefly” had fans (most of them were in the audience at the promotional screening I attended last night) but not enough for the series to continue after only eleven episodes. Nevertheless, Whedon has “juice” (“Buffy, the Vampire Slayer” and its spin-off, “Angel”) and Universal Pictures gave him money to patch together a movie of his maligned baby.
[A comment by my husband applies here: We signed up for a friend’s weeklong biofeedback program. We left after two days. My husband told the director: “How do you tell someone their baby is ugly?”]
SERENITY takes place 500 years in the future. Other solar system planets have been inhabited and the whole shebang is ambitiously controlled by the monolithic Alliance. Science now can program everyone’s thoughts and lives (For those interested, I’d like to recommend Jose M. R. Delgrado’s notorious “Physical Control of the Mind: Toward a Psychocivilized Society.”). All, except rebel Capt. Malcolm "Mal" Reynolds (Nathan Fillion) and the crew of his ship, Serenity.
The ship’s doctor, Simon (Sean Maher), needs help freeing his creepy, catatonic, but powerfully psychic, 17-year-old sister River Tam (Summer Glau), from the Alliance’s grip. Shoeless and dopey, River is the latest model of war-craft: a 90-pound killing machine with extraordinary psychic powers. River is controlled with MK-ULTRA-like commands. It is a very easy rescue but Alliance forces, led by a mysterious gent known as Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor), pursue Serenity across planetary systems. Operative will not die.
If you are not a “cult” fan, the story is simple enough to follow. Fillion, an obvious alterego for Whedon, is given all the sexy close-ups. I liked the personality of the crew, especially the guy who kept – realistically – complaining about the mission to rescue the monosyllabic River. Well, you will be pleased to know that when spooky River is programmed to kill, she finds a pair of SS regulation boots!
The physical laws of strength do not apply here. River is one of those spacey chicks that soon gets annoying. River, for all her importance to the Alliance, is a waif-burden. What I liked about SERENITY? Saying exactly what I liked is a spoiler.
SPOILER ALERT!
The deaths and the hip dialogue. Fillion does not believe in taking prisoners or letting diplomacy mar his agenda. His ex-girlfriend should be dropped off at the nearest planet. The special effects are horrible and Whedon, for all his proclaimed love for his baby, has not realized his universe with the cruel intelligence of, let’s say, BLADE RUNNER.
Victoria Alexander answers your emails and she’s emotionally prepared for the wrath of Firefly/Serenity fans. She can be reached by visiting FilmsInReview.com or, directly, at masauu@aol.com.
|
tsmeltzer writes: on Mar 09 2007 06:07 AM So says the woman who loved Norbit and The Animal. Get a real job. (Reply to this) |
|
curefreak writes: on Nov 29 2007 09:49 AM Confusing review. (Reply to this) |
|
screamsinthenight writes: on Jan 21 2008 01:50 PM This is one of the worst reviews I've ever read in my life. (Reply to this) |
|
screamsinthenight writes: on Jan 21 2008 01:56 PM And you suck. (Reply to this) |
|
Tolstoyo writes: on Feb 04 2008 10:12 PM I actually started an account just to remark on how atrocious this review is. Misleading, imperceptive and snobbish. Ironically the title is an appropriate description but not of the film. This review is HORRIBLE. On a side note this review (most might) fails to at least observe the brilliant fluency of the clever opening sequences. It is my favorite portion of the film from a technical standpoint (I'm going to share it with you because I'm a geek, but also, and more importantly, in light of such an unfair review I feel compelled to point out how daft Victoria's understanding of cinema is) It is a virtuoso sequence. The seductive editing is so remarkably seamless that it's easy to overlook its genius. Notice how from the opening shot into the punchline title, everything flows as one continuous narrative; A culmination of sequences harmonized by a singular line of thought that is unbroken by visual cuts. (The narration to the narrator, as part of a dream within an escape sequence which is a video playback watched by someone trying to find out "Where are you hiding. Little girl?" - Serenity) (i love it!) The next shot is also a technically brilliant and subtly executed long shot. Several minutes without a cut that effectively establishes all the characters. The film is flat out entertaining. That will be all for today. (Reply to this) |
|
bittens writes: on Feb 09 2008 04:54 AM Okay. Here's the thing. Either 1)you have your facts wrong, or 2) you are purposely misrepresenting things to make the movie sound worse than it was. 1) If you can't remember what happened, at least do your bloody research. River? Has had those boots for ages. She's been on the ship *eight months.* You don't think it's reasonable she's picked up some boots in that time? You could have looked on any fansite and been told that she had those boots on the TV show. Science cannot program people's thoughts. Is River a mindless slave to the Alliance? Nope. Is there anything to suggest that they can outright control people's thoughts? Nope. In fact, quite the opposite, since River is their best effort and she's definetly not under their control. I'm not sure where you got the idea that they control people's lives, either. Sure, they like to be in control, but they're not mapping out the lives of every little person in the galaxy or anything. Mal and the crew are not the only ones who are not so enamoured with the Alliance. Hello, you can't fight a war with nine people. Lots of people dislike them. They lost the war and are offically under Alliance rule, but they don't like it, and quite a few of them turn to a life of crime instead. River is dopey? Uh-uh. She's crazy, but by no means is she like that little dude from Snow White. She's not bumbling, she's not stupid. She's just crazy, graceful, psychic, very intelligent, and could kick the Karate Kid's sorry ***. Simon spent his entire fortune getting in to rescue River. And seeing as we didn't see exactly how he did get in there, I don't why you're saying it's easy. It could have taken him years for all we know. River was not catatonic. She was schizophrenic and she had lost the ability to block her emotions, meaning she felt the full brunt of everything and couldn't do anything about it. 2) For Christ's sake, if the movie was really so awful, you wouldn't have to lie about it to make it sound worse than it was. Now, onto opinions. So, Joss Whedon, in all his arrogance, is writing a romanticized portrait of himself in the form of Malcolm Reynolds. Mal does indeed have lots of sexy close ups, just like the stars of every other movie since they came up with the tecnique of close-ups. Because movie stars are hot, duh. Why does a sixteen year old have to explain this concept to you? Furthermore, Mal is an angry ******* for a good 40 minutes of the movie. It's pointed out several times, so we can safely assume that that was on purpose. Why would Joss write his obvious alterego as an angry *******? So, now we are left with River being annoying and the special effects being awful. There have been so many facts wrong about River that I don't think we can consider your opinion an informed or accurate one, and as the special effects... They were low budget, so the effects are nothing special. But they also had a great team who was very dedicated, and I didn't see anything bad in the effects either. They were just average. By this stage, the only point in your review that I have not completely ripped apart is an unsupported statement about the effects, which would be impossible to disprove anyway, because of the aforementioned part about it being unsupported. Also, I've never seen The Animal, but you apparently liked Norbit. I think I understand why you gave such an incredibly inaccurate review of Serenity. And I gotta tell you, watching films while smashed and then reviewing them just can't be good for your career. (Reply to this) |
|
RHF writes: on Jun 24 2009 01:54 PM Wow, and here I was having trouble figuring out a single word to use to describe you as a reviewer and a person. Thanks! (Reply to this) |
| You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register. |




