Firefly tonight: Credit where credit is due
Milhouse Van Houten
and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his best. In so many cases it's all downhill after a
pilot, but by starting off poorly, Firefly has somewhere to go.
Question: Who exactly did the sex bomb identify herself as? Are we supposed to know the
name?
William J. Pitcher
> The first episode was a 'C'; the second a 'B'; this one an 'A'.
> They're making progress, and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his
> best. In so many cases it's all downhill after a pilot, but by
> starting off poorly, Firefly has somewhere to go.
I enjoyed this episode much more than the first two. I am not sure if the
episode is that much better, or if it just comes down to knowing the players
better. Probably some of both. Either way, definitely encouraging for the
future.
By the way, I'll have to remember some of her lines for the right romantic
evening.
Cheers, Bill.
Patty Winter
Milhouse Van Houten <bt...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> They're making progress,
>and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his best.
It's a very witty show. I laughed several times tonight.
[minor spoilers ahead]
>Question: Who exactly did the sex bomb identify herself as? Are we
supposed to know the >name? > >
Saffron never gave Malcolm her real name. What I was wondering was,
did the people on Triumph know who she was, and who she was working
for? That doesn't seem likely, since they were trying to get rid of
the bad guys. But it seemed like a small enough community that the
elder would have noticed a stranger, especially one leading his
honored guest through a wedding ritual.
Patty
David Johnston
>
> The first episode was a 'C'; the second a 'B'; this one an 'A'. They're making progress,
> and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his best. In so many cases it's all downhill after a
> pilot, but by starting off poorly, Firefly has somewhere to go.
>
> Question: Who exactly did the sex bomb identify herself as?
She didn't. He saw that she was hesitating, and punched her out.
I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really is badly
designed. Also, this whole old west thing is overly limiting and unnecessary.
Milhouse Van Houten
news:anlosl$ugg$1...@newbolt.sonic.net...
> In article <Hytn9.45791$PP.52810@rwcrnsc53>,
>
>
>
> [minor spoilers ahead]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Saffron never gave Malcolm her real name. What I was wondering was,
> did the people on Triumph know who she was, and who she was working
> for? That doesn't seem likely, since they were trying to get rid of
> the bad guys. But it seemed like a small enough community that the
> elder would have noticed a stranger, especially one leading his
> honored guest through a wedding ritual.
I was thinking when Saffron identified herself as so-and-so's widow. I didn't recognize
who she was talking about. Did I mishear this?
Milhouse Van Houten
news:0Dtn9.183182$8b1....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
> By the way, I'll have to remember some of her lines for the right romantic
> evening.
Some of that dialog deserves to be quoted and analyzed. It was astonishing.
Patty Winter
>news:anlosl$ugg$1...@newbolt.sonic.net...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Saffron never gave Malcolm her real name.
>
>who she was talking about. Did I mishear this?
Oh, she said, "Malcolm Reynolds' widow." She meant that Malcolm
was either dead or about to be. (I think the latter. From what
the doctor said, the stuff on her lips was a minor knockout drug.
It was her pirate friends who were going to kill everyone on the
Serenity.)
Patty
bicker
<rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really is badly
> designed.
Agreed.
> Also, this whole old west thing is overly limiting and unnecessary.
I disagree. If it wasn't a Western, it would just be yet-another
ho-hum SciFi program.
--
¤bicker¤ 263/158
fit...@brianandrobbie.com BP: 130/80 -> 100/60
See web site for Total Cholesterol: 256->186
before and after photos. Waist: 46 -> 34
http://brianandrobbie.com BF%: 39% -> 13%
J T
| I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really
| is badly designed.
Why? Virtually every gun currently made will not fire properly in the vacuum
of space. Everyone seems fixated on their weapons, assuming they should have
amazing blasters or lasers. Well maybe the technology of hand weapons have
not evolved as far as people are assuming. Or if so, I have no problem
accepting that these outlying worlds barely scratching out a survival would
be limited to more primitive weaponry. And "Firefly" is certainly not the
first futuristic show to use guns with bullets.
However, one effect that does fall flat for me is the soundless space. Sure
ever since "Star Wars" people have been yelling that explosions & sound are
not possible in space. As true as that is, the scenes just don't work as
well without them.
| Also, this whole old west thing is overly limiting and unnecessary.
I disagree. The western theme actually increases the potential story lines.
Last night's episode was set up nicely with the old prairie celebration
which led to the Captain's unexpected betrovement.
JJ
>"David Johnston" wrote in message ...
>| I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really
>| is badly designed.
>Why? Virtually every gun currently made will not fire properly in the vacuum
>of space.
Please elaborate on what you mean by "will not fire properly" because
I disagree. A primer will fire, the "gun powder" (aka
nitrocellulose) will ignite and generate gas, unseat the bullet from
the casing and push it down the barrel. I doubt the absence of 1
atmosphere of air pressure will throw a gas feed semi or fully
automatic weapon out of whack.
Jay
David Johnston
>
> "David Johnston" wrote in message ...
> | I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really
> | is badly designed.
>
> Why? Virtually every gun currently made will not fire properly in the vacuum
> of space.
Why not?
JJ
>Milhouse Van Houten wrote:
>> The first episode was a 'C'; the second a 'B'; this one an 'A'.
>> They're making progress, and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his
>> best. In so many cases it's all downhill after a pilot, but by
>> starting off poorly, Firefly has somewhere to go.
I'd been reading here that FireFly was only so so and I had not paid
it much more attention.
This is the first episode for me and I came in right at halfway at the
bare back scene and she is saying something like "I swell at the
thought of you inside me and I see that you do too..." Needless that
got my attention as did the sheer sensuality of her 2 other err
pitches. I was like "should I be getting out more or was that super
smokingly erotic ?" Christina Hendricks and the dialogue were
amazing. The switch from grateful peasant girl to cool rogue agent -
whoa that's acting!
Peasant frocked women who don't wear much makeup and also know their
way around a wiring harness and can headkick are sooo hot!
>I enjoyed this episode much more than the first two. I am not sure if the
>episode is that much better, or if it just comes down to knowing the players
>better. Probably some of both. Either way, definitely encouraging for the
>future.
I'll be paying more attention to this series. It seems a good
character for the fellow from "2 girls, guy, pizza place" or whatever
it ended up being titled.
>By the way, I'll have to remember some of her lines for the right romantic
>evening.
I'd certainly pay attention if I heard them again.
How about that gruff crewman who said something like "That's why I
never kiss em on the lips!" <mind in gutter!>
Jay the pig
ANIM8Rfsk
<< However, one effect that does fall flat for me is the soundless space. Sure
ever since "Star Wars" people have been yelling that explosions & sound are
not possible in space. As true as that is, the scenes just don't work as
well without them. >>
Ack. That's one of the best parts of the show. Absolutely brilliant.
Irulan
"David Johnston" <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote in message
news:3D9E59...@telusplanet.net...
I was totally prepared to dislike this show from the beginning, but I am
actually really liking it. I hope FOX gives it a chance, the writing is so
Joss Whedon.
I think the western-space cowboy setting is actually what makes this so
watchable.
--
Irulan
from the stars we came
to the stars we return
from now until the end of time
Qbert
> Please elaborate on what you mean by "will not fire properly" because
> I disagree. A primer will fire, the "gun powder" (aka
> nitrocellulose) will ignite and generate gas, unseat the bullet from
> the casing and push it down the barrel. I doubt the absence of 1
> atmosphere of air pressure will throw a gas feed semi or fully
> automatic weapon out of whack.
While the first bullet would probably fire with no problem, a modern gas
powered automatic weapon would most likely not advance the next round in the
presence of a vacuum, though one could easily be designed to do so.
Regardless, I find it entirely plausible that a weapon such as Vera could
have a design that might not work in space. Tradeoffs are always a part of
technology, and maybe the benefits of some part of her design limits her
ability to fire in a vacuum. And having to fire a weapon in space may not be
high priority.
Ian J. Ball
David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> Milhouse Van Houten wrote:
> >
> > The first episode was a 'C'; the second a 'B'; this one an 'A'. They're
> > making progress,and tonight's was Joss very nearly at his best. In so
> > many cases it's all downhill after a pilot, but by starting off poorly,
> > Firefly has somewhere to go.
> >
> > Question: Who exactly did the sex bomb identify herself as?
>
> She didn't. He saw that she was hesitating, and punched her out.
>
> I have two beefs. First of all, any gun that only works in air really is
> badly designed. Also, this whole old west thing is overly limiting and
> unnecessary.
Totally with you on both counts, Dave.
--
Ian J. Ball | "No, that other chick was like so boring. Bring back the
TV lover, and | horniest babe since Samantha on S&tC: Grace 'Burner'
Usenet slacker | Turner, the one whose legs go up to her ears."
ib...@san.rr.com | - Carol Frilegh in rec.arts.tv.soaps.cbs
| http://members.aol.com/IJBall/WWW/TV.html
JJ
><jayj...@nadasppam-yahoo.com JJ (JJ)> wrote in message...
>> Please elaborate on what you mean by "will not fire properly" because
>> I disagree. A primer will fire, the "gun powder" (aka
>> nitrocellulose) will ignite and generate gas, unseat the bullet from
>> the casing and push it down the barrel. I doubt the absence of 1
>> atmosphere of air pressure will throw a gas feed semi or fully
>> automatic weapon out of whack.
>
>While the first bullet would probably fire with no problem, a modern gas
>powered automatic weapon would most likely not advance the next round in the
>presence of a vacuum, though one could easily be designed to do so.
Hi Qbert,
"J T" <no...@present.net> said "Virtually every gun currently made will
not fire properly in the vacuum of space" and I think that is wrong.
Why wouldn't revolvers, lever action, bolt action and recoil action
guns fire repeatedly in space?
Jay
William George Ferguson
The absence of atmosphere will throw a gas feed semi or fully
automatic weapon out of whack.
Repeaters are moderately complicated mechanical constructions, with a
lot of finely machined metal parts working in contact with each other.
Virtually any percussion firearm will fire the first time in vacuum,
but the likelihood of such a weapon, which isn't designed to fire in
vacuum, seizing up increases exponentially with each round. If they
could be sure one round would take out the generator/projector then
they probably wouldn't have needed that suit. Of course, they not
only wanted to disable the net, they wanted to provide parting gifts
for the ship, in the form of lots of neat little bullet-sized holes
letting out the air.
One thing I really liked about that scene was the three-man fire team
approach to shooting in space, with Mal and Zoe anchoring and bracing
Jayne.
--
I think it's entirely possible that we might try to fool
people hell bent on spoiling our season. We're deceptive
people. We promote sex and violence and the occult. Frankly,
we're just not good seeds.
-- Drew Goddard (Bronze Beta 8/28/2002)
Dwayne Allen Day
In article <3dab09e1....@news.earthlink.net>,
jayj...@nadasppam-yahoo.com JJ (JJ) wrote:
> This is the first episode for me and I came in right at halfway at the
> bare back scene and she is saying something like "I swell at the
> thought of you inside me and I see that you do too..." Needless that
> got my attention as did the sheer sensuality of her 2 other err
> pitches. I was like "should I be getting out more or was that super
> smokingly erotic ?" Christina Hendricks and the dialogue were
> amazing. The switch from grateful peasant girl to cool rogue agent -
> whoa that's acting!
That was a great scene...
Unfortunately, you missed all the setup. Basically, she was a shy, innocent
peasant girl for the whole first half. Totally believable. Then she turns
into cool "player." Totally believable. I had not seen the promos. At the
beginning of the show I thought "Oh, she's trouble. She's not what she
seems to be." But by the halfway mark, when she still had not turned evil I
thought that maybe she was just what she appeared to be. So her switch was
a shock. Great writing. Great acting.
There was another scene later on that I would like to see again and that's
when Mal is talking to the preacher and essentially says something like
"We're not going to kill them." (the scrapyard guys who are trying to kill
everyone on the ship) Then he and his buddy set up the gun, take out the
transformer--and kill the two guys. Pretty savvy.
D
jere7my tho?rpe
Roy Knable <r...@hellvision.com> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't B5 also eschew space sound effects
> for all of its five year run?
Afraid you're wrong. They discussed it, but wound up using
standard explosion and "zoom" sounds in all but a few cases.
----j7y
--
*************************************************************************
jere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 "Homo sum: humani nihil a me
http://homepage.mac.com/jere7my alienum puto." ---Terentius
ra...@vt.edu
> <jayj...@nadasppam-yahoo.com JJ (JJ)> wrote in message...
>> Please elaborate on what you mean by "will not fire properly" because
> While the first bullet would probably fire with no problem, a modern gas
> powered automatic weapon would most likely not advance the next round in the
> presence of a vacuum, though one could easily be designed to do so.
I can't think of any reason they would not work. The gas that powers
the ejection and new round advance is the same gas generated by the
bullet when it fires. The rest is mechanical action, not pneumatic.
The only possible problem I can envision would be possible lake
of heat dissipation due to lack of airflow, but that would take
a few rounds to become a problem.
> Regardless, I find it entirely plausible that a weapon such as Vera could
> have a design that might not work in space. Tradeoffs are always a part of
> technology, and maybe the benefits of some part of her design limits her
> ability to fire in a vacuum. And having to fire a weapon in space may not be
> high priority.
Well, I can agree with this part, but it did seem an odd
limitation when I was watching the show.
Bill Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.
William December Starr
anim...@aol.comNOSPAM (ANIM8Rfsk) said:
>> However, one effect that does fall flat for me is the soundless
>> space. Sure ever since "Star Wars" people have been yelling that
>> explosions & sound are not possible in space. As true as that is,
>> the scenes just don't work as well without them. ["J T"]
>
> Ack. That's one of the best parts of the show. Absolutely
> brilliant.
Seconded. ("Pow") ("Pow") ("Pow") in perfect silence. Beautiful.
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>