Dear Firefly Fans: Haven't You a Better Cause to Donate Your Money To?
Dear Firefly fans: I read this morning that you plan to pool your money in a massive campaign to collectively buy the rights to your short-lived favorite TV series. The drive follows comments by its star, Nathan Fillion, who recently told EW, "If I got $300 million from the California Lottery, the first thing I would do is buy the rights to Firefly, make it on my own, and distribute it on the Internet." On the one hand, the cost of the actual rights would cost a mere fraction of that amount. On the other hand -- and I hate to break this to you -- there are far worthier uses of your money than reviving a canceled TV show.
Look, nothing against Firefly or Fillion or creator Joss Whedon; the show was good, and those are two stand-up dudes whom I like a lot. Nothing against you either! I know what it's like to have a cultural touchstone pulled out from under me -- it doesn't feel great, and that open wound doesn't heal for some time. News of imminent Firefly reruns on The Science Channel does little if anything to assuage that anguish.
That said, you've got to be kidding me with this "Help Nathan Buy Firefly" Web site and Facebook page, the latter of which boasts 68,000 fans (and counting) and actually includes such comments as:
"Consider this: this page has over 66000 likes at this time. If they created one new episode a week and sold them for a $1 on iTunes that could be $66,000 a week. Would that be enough?"
and:
$1000 from russian fan
and:
"We need to do more then just talk. Hitting that like button does not make allot [sic] of noise. Our numbers are strong and on the rise so we need to strike while we have the momentum, we need someone to step up and organize something a fund raiser for a news ad, or maybe a donation to Nathan's charity. Something to prove we are more then just a bunch of people that can click a button."
Hey! Charity! There you go. After all, you may have heard about the enduring horror of the Haiti earthquake aftermath, where food, clean water and medical aid have been in short supply for more than a year since the temblor struck. The residents of Christchurch, New Zealand, could use help as well after their own recent quake. Lord only knows what kind of help the residents of Tripoli -- particularly widows and children -- will need if/when the violent uprising there succeeds in toppling Qaddafi. If you feel like making a political statement, there's always either side of the ongoing strife in Madison, Wisc., which is spreading now to other state capitals in Iowa, Indiana and elsewhere. And this is just a rundown of current events off the top of my head; surely others near you could use your largess as well.
Just as surely you must remember that time you even pooled together $14,000 to buy Firefly DVD sets for Navy crews at sea. That works, too! What doesn't work is contributing a cent of your own money to get a canceled, decade-old sci-fi venture back on the air. Let's be honest: That's money you don't have. None of us do. It's a recession! Things are terrible. Furthermore, it's not your responsibility! This effort is what producers do, and Whedon hasn't done it because at some point he -- and don't take this the wrong way -- moved the hell on.
Sure, Fillion raised the issue with his comments to EW, but that's what actors do: Make splashes, push buttons, daydream and, well, act! Trust me: If Nathan Fillion won the California Lottery, his prize would neither be $300 million nor invested in reviving Firefly for the Internet. If he developed anything with that cash, it would be something new that more people want to watch. You know this, and I know you know this.
Anyway, everyone sincerely appreciates your spirit; most stars and their showrunners would give anything to have a fan base like yours, and part of that appreciation stems from knowing you'll do right by them and others in the end, no matter what. But for the record, this is the end. Please either put your checkbook back in your browncoat, or consider contributing where 68,000 people's interest and resources are needed. Cool? Thanks.
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
Hi there,
you nailed it. Perfect reaction to this stupid article.
thanx for that. exactly my opinion !
cheers from germany
beate
"Let’s be honest: That’s money you don’t have. None of us do. It’s a recession! Things are terrible. Furthermore, it’s not your responsibility! This effort is what producers do, and Whedon hasn’t done it because at some point he — and don’t take this the wrong way — moved the hell on."
I find this particularly unthoughtful. Who's to say if people have money to spend or not. Most people spend money on entertainment whether we have a lot of it or not, maybe we don't. I have enough, and either way that is a decision I must make for myself. Also...the a major part of the internet and the entrainment industry is that it rapidly evolves. So crowd sourced producing could be a "thing" and it could become bigger than it is now. All it does is change the way the business works a little and fulfills a need that is obviously there, not just perceived.
Thanks for voicing your opinions on this matter, but if you have the time, please come down from your ivory tower and get a feel for what it's like in the real world. People support causes; not always good causes, not always the most charitable causes, but causes nonetheless. Who are you to berate a dedicated group of fans for attempting to breathe new life into their favorite show? I'm pretty sure you aren't giving all of your after-tax earnings to charity, so why don't you let the browncoats (I'm proud to be one of 'em, btw) spend their money as they see fit. You can't stop the signal!!
thanx james,
agree with you completely, is this what we call journalism today ?
cheers
beate
Dear S. T. Vanairsdale: Haven't You a Better Cause to Complain About?
The idea of the group is not a charity. We would be giving money to receive a product that we desire. We aren't giving money away with no expectation of a return. We expect to get some more of the thing we have all enjoyed and feel there should have been more of. I'm sure that there are others (myself included) who give to charity out of their pockets. Charity is giving without the expectation of a return; this is not a charity.
And let's be clear, just because the country is in recession doesn't mean that there is no money, just that it is more difficult to get money. I mean, you have a computer and internet access. Instead of spending money on such frivolous luxuries you could have donated that money to charity and helped people in the areas you mentioned. Just something for you to think about.
PS: If you are going to say "nothing against you either!" and then go on to imply that because we want a television show back that we don't care about the devastation in Haiti, New Zealand, Tripoli, Egypt, or the protests in Wisconsin, you shouldn't even hold the pretense of being polite.
Please either stop writing, or consider writing about something worthwhile that doesn't make you look like a hypocrite. Cool? Thanks.
Trolling for web hits eh? Smart move to choose a devoted fan base of 68000 and rising. Hell after we all hit your article and leave a comment you'll probably get a raise. Whatcha gonna do with that money? Donate it to charity I hope.
Dear Concerned Self-aggrandizing Know-it-all,
Kiss my ass.
Sincerely,
All of us.
Thank you all, random posters and first time visitors, for making feel shame for being a Browncoat. At least your arguments are more coherent than the Twihards.
PS- While we're at it, it's cool in theory but Detroit doesn't need a statue of a fictional robot police man who, upon closer inspection, cleaned up the mean streets of Houston.
Wow, 34 comments and counting, and the posts before and after this one have 0 comments. I think this indicates the kind of passion Firefly fans (I'm one of them) have for their show. With the possible exception of the more dedicated Star Trek fans, no show has a more intense fanbase. That being said, I do think the comments attacking S.T. are over the top. He occasionally posts things that irritate me, but he seems like a good guy overall, and I don't think he meant to personally insult anyone.
What S.T.'s post missed is what most of the comments have pointed out, this isn't a charitable donation, it's essentially a contribution to a business. Charitable donations are made without expectation of anything in return, but FF fans want something in return for their money, they want more Firefly. To bring a show back, you have to have a dedicated fanbase, talent willing to return to the show (or movies) and timing. The first two are already in place, all that is lacking is timing, and that could change in the future.
If you think that Firefly has no chance to return in some form, consider how hopeless the Star Trek cause must have seemed in the early 70's. It's fans persevered, the talent wanted to make more Star Trek, and the timing was finally right after Star Wars made a ton of money and execs at Paramount remembered that they had a SciFi property of their own. I think there is still hope for more Firefly, and it's good to see that the community is still going strong.
This article just invoked a feeling I haven't had since I was a child, when my mother told me I had to finish eating my vegetables because there were children starving in Ethiopia. This panicked feeling deep in your gut because you want to help starving children, and the helplessness of looking down at your last green beans and realizing that there was a much bigger world out there, and your parents were talking down to you.
I can't really add anything to this discussion that hasn't been said, except that I don't enjoy someone talking down to me. Granted, the article is well written. It even takes a kind and conciliatory tone, talking about those "two stand-up dudes" he likes a lot. I'm going to assume that he sent some money (even if it is only $30, less than one dollar a day) to the relief efforts in Haiti and New Zealand. Apparently, he also wants to enlighten me because he read about some current events. I might have missed those while watching Firefly.
My personal favorite is the idea that Nathan Fillion would put his money into a new series that more people would want to watch! He could invest in some new reality shows, since they are a cash cow. You know this, and I know you know this!
Writer of this "article" is clueless.
The whole "why do this, when something bad is happening elsewhere" argument can be applied to literally anything.
And of course he is ignorant of how much the Firefly/Serenity community has raised for charity. Probably way more than this "writer" will even come close to in his/her lifetime.
Turn off your computer. Stop paying for your Internet connection. Give all your belongings to charity and join the Peace Corps. Maybe then you can stand in your Ivory Tower and judge the Browncoats.
Uh. I'm not fan of this particular effort, so I certainly don't object to your criticism there. But it'd be nice if you knew what you were talking about. Can't Stop the Serenity, in the five years it's existed to show the movie every year in a semi-coordinated global effort for charity, has raised over half a million dollars, mostly for Joss' favorite group Equality Now.
The fact that one misguided effort to revive the series (one of many such misguided efforts in the last ten years) is getting all the attention doesn't mean this is how all Firefly fans think.
Thank you all for your posts!
Cheers from Germany.
Author, you are making a few fallacious arguments. First, you assume that people pledging to donate to HNBF do not also donate to charity. Perhaps they already donate generously to charity, and choose to donate money to this as well.
Second, you are insinuating that expendable income must go to charity, as a matter of ethical priority. Should people also not give money to public radio and television? What about money for school kids to buy athletic equipment? You cannot dictate how people spend their money. It is a slippery slope.
Third, are you giving all the proceeds of that wall of advertising on the right of your blog to charity? If not, roll up your self-righteous blog and shelve it.
I love Firefly. Love it. But this constant compulsion of fans to somehow "bring it back" is naive and embarrassing. It's over enjoy the season and movi.e
Also, if you wandered over to Movieline because your newsreader popped up something Firefly, go away.
Fillion sounds pathetic and this whole thing is just hysterical. I hope they all give money and end up getting the show back on the air....and then two months later when its canceled again they'll realize how stupid they were.
Chris is the winner, and besides if all else fails there are charities chosen to receive any money if it goes that far...
Are you just messing with folks, or did someone hack your comment sign in?
Or are you in Germany, too?
Don't you have something better to write about? Why do entertainment sites exist when there are charities that will take the money put into them? Why do we buy cars, when we could walk and give a homeless family $500 a month?
Your moral high ground isn't very stable.
I give money to United Way and the World Society for the Protection of Animals. I am always there to help my friends if I can. And I am so glad to read these responses.
It's okay to pay for things we like - music, movie tickets, tv on demand, DVDs. That doesn't make us evil. It makes us human. And as other people have noted, Movieline isn't a website devoted to collecting contributions for various charities, it's an entertainment site.
Isn't there something just a little bizarre about a site devoted to embracing both the good and bad of pop entertainment suggesting that people should only support forms of entertainment that the writer specifically finds worthy?
I've been reading Movieline - and commenting on the site - for a long time now. I think you're name is perfect. You are brown shit. Thanks for the condescension, dick cheese.
If you believe I am in Germany would you also give me $700,000 to start production on new episodes of "Green Acres"?
Personally I think this is awesome. If people want to try and raise money to get something they are passionate about back on the air, what's the harm? I found this site using my Logitech Revue with Google TV after seeing an article about Firefly being rebroadcast on The Science Channel. I'm a DISH employee and customer so I can't wait to catch this in HD.
This is the most pompous article I've read in 20 years. What dribble.
If one were to follow S.T. VanAirsdale's logic, no one should go to Disneyland, movie theaters or plays either because there are places in the world that are in need. Hey VanAirsdale, go tell George Lucas that he shouldn't be peddling trinkets, and posters and action figures for the kids. Do us a favor and video tape it so America can laugh at you when he reacts.
I absolutely would kick in a $100 to revive Firefly. I'd buy stock for $1000's if it went public. And this is what fans do. Fans campaigned to bring back Star Trek.... guess what... it worked.
There are plenty of causes right here in the USA so why didn't you mention any those? Is it because not only are you a hipocrite, but are also too lazy to look them up? S.T. VanAirsdale is too worried about Libya to donate to Toys For Tots, Make A Wish, Local Women's Shelter's, The Salvation Army, The Blood Bank - Red Cross, Goodwill, Habitat For Humanity, Homeless Shelters, Meals On Wheels, and all the others?
So I already served in Peace Corps, donated to the Red Cross after the Haitian earthquake and sent money to help people in Christchurch. And I bought those guys camped out in Wisconsin a pizza. Do I get to do something for myself now? Is it OK? Please, please tell me, because you know, your audience isn't really made up of people who normally spend money on movie tickets and DVDs- we all read this site because we can't make a decision without hearing from you, in your uniquely condescending pompous self-rightous tone, how we are supposed to be spending our money.
Next » « Previous