Just watched the pilot episode and feel everyone's great but Nathan Fillion seems miscast or not up to the tough captain part, was cast for his looks most likely. Adam Baldwin would have been better for that part going by what I've seen after the first show. Nathan just seems to soft. I've been an Alan Tudyk fan since I watched A Knight's Tale several years ago. I wasnt watching much tv when this show was on but saw it listed here on IMDB or possibly other places in the last 5 years. It seems it is pretty good for an old show...........how the heck is 2002 old now, time flies!!!
Uh....oh,oh, it's the pancakes! You don't like pancakes, I will get you somethin else!
reply
share
Eva_Marrie
8 years ago
Nathan's casting actually seems perfect to me. 'Soft' is a strange description for him because he has a real old Hollywood type of gentlemanly masculinity going on. You don't have to look like a hulking body-builder to project masculinity onscreen (something modern superhero and action flicks don't seem to get).
The captain's part is that more of a dreamer with lofty ideals than a fighter. Plus, Adam is so perfect in his comic relief role. The lead wouldn't give him as many opportunities for humour.
reply
share
canuckteach
8 years ago
So, now that Filion is OUT of the Castle franchise, loaded with money he made from a show that probably should have only lasted a season or two, the question is: will he keep his long-ago promise to produce a prequel to Firefly? All the actors said they would be 'in', if ever the franchise was ever resurrected. Whedon's number is in the book. Here's hoping.
:-) canuckteach (--:
reply
share
sati_84
8 years ago
If it would be up to Nathan, it would be on our screens already. But it's up to FOX...
FOX still owns the rights. Nathan can't buy it from his own pocket. For this to work, Netflix (or whoever else) needs to invest a lot of money first to get the rights - and FOX might not even be willing to sell for a reasonable amount.
If and only if Netflix (or whoever else) is able to purchase the rights, can we even start to dream about a renewal.
So don't blame Nathan. He is not able to do it alone. I'm sure he would if he could.
I was looking back to see if you were looking back at me to see me looking back at you
reply
share
NVDan
8 years ago
FOX still owns the rights.
I'm curious what your source for this is. When the show was first cancelled there was a lot of talk on this board about some other network or cable channel taking it. At the time it was said FOX would have to sell the TV rights because they owned those rights for 5 years. The five years passed long ago so I'm wondering what changed.
___
I've seen a bear do things that even a bear wouldn't do.
reply
share
sati_84
8 years ago
I didn't check, but every time the idea of renewal comes up on Reddit's /r/firefly subreddit, someone mentions that FOX still owns the rights, and no one gets called out on it. So I took the liberty to state this as a fact.
Might not be right, but I would not know where to check...
I was looking back to see if you were looking back at me to see me looking back at you
reply
share
NVDan
8 years ago
I didn't check, but every time the idea of renewal comes up on Reddit's /r/firefly subreddit, someone mentions that FOX still owns the rights
Maybe it's a holdover from when it was an issue. Or it could be people are confusing the rights to the original episodes (which FOX still owns) and the rights to make new episodes for TV.
___
I've seen a bear do things that even a bear wouldn't do.
reply
share
PreachCaleb
8 years ago
I think a big issue is that Fox is so big and has so many subsidiaries, it's not as simple as "Fox owns the rights."
After all, 20th Television was the distributor, but 20th Century Fox Television was the actual production company. Who knows what the contract details are.
You are sin.
reply
share