Firefly vs. Buffy

R

Relic

Darth Zeppo
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
815
Age
50
Location
dagoba
I have never watched a full episode of Firefly. It involves both space opera and Joss....I lick the chops with anticipation. It MUST be good. A perfect suit for me....

It was for TV and even launched a movie (something I hope..likely in vain...will be done with Buffy one day.) Yet I must wonder, and maybe some huge fan of the series can answer it.....why the one shot?

Buffy endured for 7 seasons and is working on its eighth. I'm pretty sure Firefly did not make it into a season two, (But again the movie is a pretty big deal)

Why is this?

Was it due to a decision by Joss. Did Firefly not play to that developing audience and grown up audience alike, like Buffy did? Does space opera lag behind soap opera...or better said does Horror play second fiddel to sci-fi? Why not more seasons to Firefly?

I have not even seen any of this series, yet I wish it ran longer.

Sorry if this thread is placed wrong, and I certainly don't want a war to break out over Firefly vs. Buffy....I have experienced this board to be above that sort of thing anyway...I'm just wondering what opinions are of this.... from a Buffy fan perspective. (short of the Toy story screen play, Buff is the biggest draw our friend joss has captured...at least one I have the most understanding of.)

Why do you feel that Firefly hasn't lasted as long as Buffy.... series wise? I know this is a loaded question and mean no disrespect toward anyones fan-fave. I just am curious as to the world of Joss as viewed by the viewers.

It's a question asked in ignorance; but I honestly feel Joss beats George. Is Firefly going to fly further? If not what went wrong?

Thanks.
 
It was more about scheduling and lack of faith from the network than lack of watcher . . . ship. I think they were both awesome, and the fact that Firefly had a movie is testament to the enormous fan following it had.
 
I kind of figured as much, tis a shame then.

Anyone else want to weigh in?
 
I love Firefly. Too bad it got cancelled. But I guess it didn´t have enough viewers so not much to do. The fact that a movie was made is because of the fans and all the dvd´s they bought. I recommend you to watch the show and movie as soon as possible and then you´re done with that you should check out Done the Impossible - The Fans' Tale of Firefly and Serenity At least if you enjoyed the show.
 
R
Relic
I'll do this. thank you for the information. Buffy failed as a movie but succeeded as a series. I hope a second chance is given. I'm betting I'll love this series.
Sure, I'll weigh in.

"Problems" with Firefly not related to scheduling:
No bumpy head alien of the week (network no-no)
No sound in space so zippy spaceship noises went bye-bye (fan no-no)
No FTL for spaceships (fan interest plummets as not being sci-fi enough)
Jerky docu-camera style done before it became popular on BSG (same company though; ZOIC)
Real cowboys in space with horses and everything (sci-fi western? Not nerdy enough to sci-fi'ers)
Real cowboy slang (and Mandarin which means fans can't invent a new language to be cool)
No ray-guns (well ok no 'everyone and their mother has one' ray-guns)
Prostitutes in Space! (wish the Muppet Show had done that one)
They actually had toilets (this is completely against sci-fi laws)
No technobabble (the ultimate insult)
 
It's complex, of course. There was as BB mentioned a lot of mismanagement by Fox with Firefly, but ultimately it couldn't produce the numbers.

It might be a mistake however to think of Buffy as a populist hit. BTVS was never a ratings star. It was however the flagship of a fledgling network based on it's critical status, ability to attract media attention, youth oriented themes, and strong cult status. It was what the much smaller than Fox, WB, was going for at the time, and what held it through the 5 years at the WB. Another fledgling network, UPN, took it over for 2 years for much the same reasons. But Buffy's ratings were never better than all right. However that was for a network lacking the same ratings needs a larger network like Fox had at the time of Firefly. In fact, without even double-checking I'll wager Firefly's ratings were better than Buffy's.

I personally doubt BTVS would have made it out of season 1 with Fox either.
 
The treatment Firefly got has always been a mystery to me.

I won't say that it would had got better rating...
But showing the episodes in correct order so they made sense would be a good start.
Whatever feelings the bosses at Fox had for Firefly, they just must have known that they mistreated it.
And I just can't figure out why, it seems like a waste of money to me.

I wonder if it would have been possible to do pretty much the same show, but cheaper, and have it on a smaller network.
Kinda like Buffy I guess... or would it just not be possible to make it good enough that way?

Anyway, it's a shame. It was a great show. I want to know more about that universe.
Not sure how the movie made it moneywise. Is there any chance for another movie?

/SK
 
The point is, Buffy did get Fox...and did not disappoint it. What of the WB to UPN jump...look at the numbers...at the time WB was sinking....(least i was told so) I think Joss made a wise decision. he seems to make a habit of that.

I would put Buffy up against Firefly without even watching it and expect Buffy to win., because by the armchair quarterback...Buffy is the sure bet to my uninformed mind. (and the fickeld whore that is history)

What night did Buffy run on in season one and against what compition? What about Firefly? I think a breakdown might be benifiacial to all the artistic minds I lurk and read 'round here

If I had to guess, i'd say Firefly's main competition was the advancement of the internet for audience numbers, in the mid to early nineties, the net was just popping, as was Buffy. That show was established before the computer could compete...in my neck of the woods at least. Firefly had to compete with an early 'you tube'.

I think I respectfully disagree with the cult following label for Buffy though..... Buffy has gone way beyond 'cult' following. If firefly could garner a movie with its one season run, then Buffy would be at least a trilogy. You could not imagine...or maybe you can...the number of casual fans I encounter in a days grace. The same can not be said of Firefly and that is a shame (perhaps my shame!) I think it deserves another chance.

Joss has a way of being ahead of the curb....take for instance Buffy the movie and its cultyness in comparison to the scream movies. Campy became cool.

Joss had the business mind and artistic drive to bring Buffy back when the time was right, just as he could read the tea leaves of the computer (speculation on my part) giving Firefly the bad flop card on the river.... (gamblers jargon)....and used the writer strike opportunity to field test a net broadcast ala Doc. Horrible.

Judging by what i've heard...space toilet or not, i hope Firefly comes back with a vengenace, ala Buffy. i think people judged its business numbers unrealistically and deprived us of future greatness.

MORE MOVIES!!!???!!!!.
 
What do you mean by "Buffy did get Fox"? It's aired in reruns on some FOX affiliates, but that's about it.

As good as Firefly is I don't think it ever could have achieved "hit" status. A space western? Definitely not mainstream, and as fans of cult TV are all too aware of, the general viewing public would rather watch something mediocre and familiar than something new, different, and challenging. Joss Whedon is a creative genius, but his work only appeals to a limited audience. I'm really hoping it's true that "Dollhouse" is more accessible than his previous works because it looks great and I want it to a success.
[br][/br]
Edit:
[br][/br]
nerd4hire said:
It's complex, of course. There was as BB mentioned a lot of mismanagement by Fox with Firefly, but ultimately it couldn't produce the numbers.

It might be a mistake however to think of Buffy as a populist hit. BTVS was never a ratings star. It was however the flagship of a fledgling network based on it's critical status, ability to attract media attention, youth oriented themes, and strong cult status. It was what the much smaller than Fox, WB, was going for at the time, and what held it through the 5 years at the WB. Another fledgling network, UPN, took it over for 2 years for much the same reasons. But Buffy's ratings were never better than all right. However that was for a network lacking the same ratings needs a larger network like Fox had at the time of Firefly. In fact, without even double-checking I'll wager Firefly's ratings were better than Buffy's.
Click to expand...

For The WB and UPN though, Buffy's ratings usually WERE considered high, simply because those networks never really got high numbers compared to the other networks. I mean, if a show had ever averaged 7 million viewers on The WB, that basically would have been their "American Idol".

Checking the ratings, season 2 of Buffy was the #3 show on the network. Seasons 3 and 4 were ranked #2, and season 5 was #3. Seasons 2-4 also averaged north of 5 million viewers, which is a bona fide hit for either The WB and UPN. (Could you imagine how ecstatic The CW would be for a show with numbers like that?)

As for the ratings for Firefly, I can't seem to find them, but for a Friday night sci-fi show on FOX, it probably only averaged 4-5 million, which would have put it about equal to Buffy. It could have gotten more, but I'd be surprised.

I don't think space sci-fi has ever been that popular on a major broadcast network.
 
I ment that Fox picked it up as a rerun, and aired it even though it had run its course, imagining that it would still draw an audience....and it still did not disappoint the network. (So much so that it has moved to a subscription version of fox, i've been told)

That is a mark of a very good show, like Seinfeld, for example.
 
Randy Giles said:
Checking the ratings, season 2 of Buffy was the #3 show on the network. Seasons 3 and 4 were ranked #2, and season 5 was #3. Seasons 2-4 also averaged north of 5 million viewers, which is a bona fide hit for either The WB and UPN. (Could you imagine how ecstatic The CW would be for a show with numbers like that?)

As for the ratings for Firefly, I can't seem to find them, but for a Friday night sci-fi show on FOX, it probably only averaged 4-5 million, which would have put it about equal to Buffy. It could have gotten more, but I'd be surprised.

I don't think space sci-fi has ever been that popular on a major broadcast network.
Click to expand...

Firefly opened at either 4.4 or 4.9 depending on whose ratings you were using. It ended arounded 2.4. My impression of Buffy the last time I remember looking (I could be wrong) was it averaged around 2.7. I do remember checking Angel's season 5 ratings, as part of the "why was it canceled" discussions, and they were superior to any Buffy season's. None of that matters though, because as has been mentioned, Fox is a larger network, and expects higher ratings.

There used to be a site where all Buffy and Angel episode ratings were archived, but it appears to be gone, or at least I can't find it.
 
Relic said:
I ment that Fox picked it up as a rerun, and aired it even though it had run its course, imagining that it would still draw an audience....and it still did not disappoint the network. (So much so that it has moved to a subscription version of fox, i've been told)

That is a mark of a very good show, like Seinfeld, for example.
Click to expand...

Buffy has never aired on FOX during the primetime hours, which is the main focus of ALL the major networks. Affiliates programmed it on weekend afternoons or at late at night. This fact has nothing to do with the conversation.

And yes, reruns air on FX, but still...primetime and syndication are two different things.
 
I disagree, i think it has alot to do with the converstaion, i introduced it after all, and I say so, sheesh.

there are no firefly reruns? Why? Why did Buffy earn the rights to reruns? Success.

Gilligans freaking island ran one season and is still airing reruns, because it was well recieved.

I'm not saying that Buffy is better than Firefly, I'm trying to get to the bottom of Firefly being 'culty' rather than media phenom.

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying, and being picked up for reruns that some people will pay for per subscription service package, plays more than a small part in numbers, popularity, and such. I believe the true judge of goodness is not how eager you are to experience it, but rather how willing you are to re-experience it.

In short, unless I'm misunderstanding you...
I thinking your wrong.
 
You obviously ARE misunderstanding me. You seem to have a very limited understanding of syndication and what it means.

Reruns on the FOX network...those were scheduled by the hundreds of local FOX affiliates, and I'm sure a lot of FOX stations didn't even air it. Every major network - ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS...their local affiliates air syndicated programming for filler. Buffy NEVER aired on FOX during primetime hours. And stations like to run shows that have lasted several seasons, because of the higher number of episodes. Firefly lasted one short season.

As for FX, it's BASIC cable, so people don't pay extra just to get it. On FX a rerun of Buffy is going to get considerably less than even a million viewers most likely, so it's kind of just filler too, they would never advertise Buffy reruns like their original series, such as Nip/Tuck.

If Buffy had ORIGINALLY aired on FOX, during primetime, and had only averaged 4 million viewers, it would have been complete toast, like N4H said. It would not have made it past season one, it MAY have gotten a second season, but that's pretty doubtful. But fortunately for us it did not, it aired on The WB, which was a less-watched network overall, where 4 million viewers is pretty solid. But for FOX, 4 million is dismal.
 
I was under the impression that even while it was being aired on the WB, Fox (as well as Joss) owned Buffy- just as it still does and was the reason why it left the WB for the UPN. This ownership makes it one less license fee for a fox affiliate to have to pay when the show is aired (as opposed to when Fox runs a Seinfield rerun) For this reason I don't share your certainty that few affiliates aired it, it's a long running show owned by Fox that was never aired on FOX untill after the series finaly..it's pretty much free money!

Some of the reason it is speculated that it was never on Fox when it first launched was worry over the FCC and what they would allow and not allow on public broadcast. Times have changed and things have relaxed abit so Buffy was given the greenlight and aired by affiliates....and this is the important part...why.....because it is a reliable draw, like the Friends or Seinfield.

I understand completely about primetime and such, but as a network you want viewers, period. If your running reruns you want good ones.

Another thing to consider, how can one argue that Buffys numbers would have been a disapointment for Fox when there is too large of a variable for a fair conclusion; if it would have premired on Fox it might have (likely) gotten higher numbers because not everyone had cable back then (now too, I guess). However, if you had a TV and an antena you could toon into Fox and then watch Buffy, at least in our hypothetical discussion.

More chances for butts in the chair to see her. I just don't see it disappointing FOX, I'll guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
 
Relic- Randy Giles is completely right, but as an addendum:

Gilligan's Island ran for three seasons, not one.

Syndication generally requires 100 or more episodes. Anything less really isn't worth paying for. Hence Buffy syndication, Firefly cancellation.

Firefly is excellent, and by not watching it you're only depriving yourself. It may have matched or surpassed the greatness of BTVS and Angel, if Serenity is any indication of what was to come. BTVS was about love, Angel was about forgiveness, and Firefly was about belief. All incredibly difficult subjects to tackle outright, made even moreso by employing metaphor, yet accomplished brilliantly time and again by Joss and Co.

Zoe: "Sir, I don't disagree on any particular point. It's just...in a time of war, we would've never left a man stranded."
Mal: "Maybe that's why we lost."

Operative: "You willing to die for that belief?"
Mal: "I am....course, that ain't exactly Plan A."
 
Thank you, AvatarofTruth, but I would never compltely agree someone is ever completely right. Also I have every intent of watching more Firefly than most stomaches can handle.

Also, I fully understand syndication despite Randy's doubts, 😛 no need for the rehash. Relic comprehend re-run, no treat like stupid head...at least not too much 🙂

The contempt of preconceived contempt is not why i posted this though, so on towards better karma.

That brings me to the thank yous....thanks for the addendum about G.I. That is the last time I trust the bathroom reader's foot notes. Also thankyou for telling me what you believe is Firefly's overall theme. Also thankyou for trying to explain syndication to me, even if it did get my nose out of joint abit.

Let the thankyou train continue although abit bumpy....

Randy Giles, to be frank you pissed me off when you said reruns play no part in a discussion that I introduced, it is Firefly vs. Buffy as far as 'greatness' goes and reruns play a huge role to me, though admittedly not in the way I initially foretold. At the same time you have been nothing but polite to me, short of the "You seem to" comment that derailed the thread and got it into rerun detail. You even explained abit about the WB being free to watch, which priorly was not my understanding.

I appreciate that and it makes my prior thought process about Buffy not getting a fair shake in premier "Fox Fashion" completely wrong. Perhaps Buffy's numbers would be very close to the same even if it would have first shown on Fox as opposed to the WB, since the WB was free TV, as you have shown me.

I beleieve in owning up when 'owned' and you clearly have the better understanding of all of this between the two of us. So I ask this.....

Brace yourself, it is a why question.....

You yourself have said that Fireflys ratings would have been a hit for the WB/UPN maybe CW too? SO why did Fox not sell the airing rights to those companies? It did that with Buffy and that kind of thing is not unheard of in cancelled shows. "My Two Sisters " did that and "Scubs" most recently was in a network aquisition war.

If your product fails in your market, but has all the attributes of succeding in another smaller market (CW or even FX) why burn the bridge and scrap the resource.

Did Joss make enemies at the old WB portion of the CW when Buffy was pulled to UPN? WAs the production cost of Firefly really high and so it would be bad bussiness to make it costly and sell it cheap? What do you all think was the deal.

I want Firefly goodness!

ON a side note, I do think that in an overall popularity contest, the ability to re-run is huge. Not only is it a guaranteed assessement of success (Needing success to get the reruns) but it also exposes the product to new consumers. I'm sure there are Buffy fans who have discovered the series well after it wrapped production thanks, in part to reruns.

Even in the overall 'experience' of it, Buffy has more to work with due to longivity of the series, a longivity that is repeated in rerun to new and old audience alike.

Firefly reruns, and compared to Buffy, how much hype can come of it.

I think the real answer we all can agree on is that Buffy is greater than Firefly as far as popularity goes because of series length and repeated exposure due to the all-mighty rerun netting new consumers, not necessarily the greatness of one product over another.

I'm sorry for the snarkyness of the "because I said so post" I felt you were completely blowing off my idea. perhaps you still will, but given the time to refine it and learn more about the topic I'm actually trying to discuss, and express my idea better...I'll wager you won't.

Either way, i appreciate your dialog and hope others will still weigh in on this.

Thanks,
Relic.

*hopes thread won't vanish into the abyss just this moment.*
 
Fox the network never owned Buffy or Angel. 20th Century Fox, which is a separate production company, produced them and sold the rights to The WB (later UPN for Buffy). Fox and 20th Century Fox are owned by Newscorp, but Fox the network has no control over Buffy or Angel.

And The WB or UPN never tried to get the rights to Firefly. No one did as far as I'm aware, and if they did, Fox (the network) had the final choice to approve whether or not someone else could get the rights.
 
Ah, so your saying that 20th century Fox is not a (the) production company for the Fox network?

Two different entities and all that if I'm reading you correctly.

Who 'produced' Firefly? Was it the network?

Either way, its a shame the network didn't shop around the product, we might be watching Firefly now!

Thanks for your patience on this.
 
20th Century Fox is a separate production company, and is not owned by Fox network, but both the Fox network and 20th are owned by Newscorp. The production company...well, produces the show and then sells it to a network. Sometimes things work differently and the network comes up with the idea first, but I *think* even then the company that actually produces it mostly owns it. I could be wrong on that part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom