# Johnny Angel's Review of Firefly **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [September 22, 2002, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181 "2002-09-22T22:46:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/21 "2002-09-24T11:32:50Z")
For what it’s worth, there is an article this weekend in the NYT magazine section about the creator Wheadon, Buffy, and Firefly. I only skimmed it but I the writer was clearly a fan and called the philosophical underpinnings of Firefly, “existentialist.” ---
**Author:** ![Wolverine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ba9def/32.png) [@Wolverine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wolverine)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/22 "2002-09-24T16:42:37Z")
It’s taken me long enough to post considering I started the other Firefly thread. I was really impressed with the show. Not too many new programs start out that solid. It has a lot of growth potential. Unfortunately, due to its genre and time slot, I can never see it reach unbelievable ratings. Maybe, they can get enough of a following and move it to Sunday nights at the X-Files old slot. That would be very nice. Oh, and put me in the “grease-spunky” fan club. Her smile makes me a little light headed. And she’s always smiling. ---
**Author:** ![Kn\_ckers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/96bed5/32.png) [@Kn\_ckers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kn_ckers)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/23 "2002-09-24T19:50:08Z")
Yeah, Grease-Spunky’s a cutie. They’re all pretty much cuties, if you ask me. And well suited to the parts - good casting. I’m a bit concerned about the rating problem, too. It seems like Fox is a little not-so-interested in making Firefly a keeper. Though I for one am determined to do my part. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Angel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d26b3c/32.png) [@Johnny\_Angel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Angel)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/24 "2002-09-24T21:38:18Z")
Well, there’s always the word-of-mouth element. But that’s a lot like “let’s put on a show!” Still, if the show inspires as many threads as Buffy has been known to do, at least it won’t be forgotten about by Dopers. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/25 "2002-09-24T21:53:58Z")
I just liked kicking the guy into the engine. Cool. ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/26 "2002-09-24T22:16:16Z")
I love grease-spunky too. So natural. ---
**Author:** ![Skippman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Skippman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skippman)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2002, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/27 "2002-09-24T23:57:47Z")
The world needs more geek chicks and the spunky engineer must stay! ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/28 "2002-09-25T00:42:24Z")
And she didn’t bitch about his getting her engine dirty. ---
**Author:** ![Menocchio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de053/32.png) [@Menocchio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Menocchio)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/29 "2002-09-25T12:57:06Z")
Yes, it appears that Whedon has fallen into a classic Hollywood trap. The low self-esteem “plain” female lead is, in fact, far more desireable to viewers than the sultry (but kind-hearted) “hot” chick, despite what teh characters would have us believe. She really is a cutie, isn’t she? I have high hopes for this show. It’s unapolegitically a western in space, but I can buy that human society evolved (regressed?) in this way. The details (the old guy is a “shepard” not a “preacher”, she’s a “companion”, not a whore) is off just enough to remind us that this is the far future, not the nineteenth century with spaceships, for some reason. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/30 "2002-09-25T13:01:10Z")
Hey, can you guys remember who sold Star Trek to NBC as “Wagon Train To The Stars?” ^:)^ ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/31 "2002-09-25T14:04:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by carnivorousplant \* > \*\*I just liked kicking the guy into the engine. > Cool. \*\* And the hero being thrown through the (force-field) window at the beginning. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/32 "2002-09-25T19:06:28Z")
A major swoon for greasy-spunky here also. I also loved how the CG effects were somewhat understated and well integrated with the live action. Far too often, in Bab5 and Farscape for example, you get “huge dramatic space nebula” then cut to “humble live action set” then cut to “huge dramatic spaceship flyby”, and so on. Firefly played the effects as matter-of-fact instead of “oh wow!” set pieces. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2002, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/33 "2002-09-25T20:33:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by GargoyleWB \* > \*\* Firefly played the effects as matter-of-fact instead of “oh wow!” set pieces. \*\* Like force field doors or replicators on Star Trek. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Kn\_ckers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/96bed5/32.png) [@Kn\_ckers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kn_ckers)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2002, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/34 "2002-09-26T12:57:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Menocchio \* > \*\*Yes, it appears that Whedon has fallen into a classic Hollywood trap. The low self-esteem “plain” female lead is, in fact, far more desireable to viewers than the sultry (but kind-hearted) “hot” chick, despite what teh characters would have us believe. \*\* Though I have to wonder if Whedon did this on purpose. I’m not super familiar with his other work, so I don’t know if he usually has the flashy gals ruling the roost, but from what I know of Buffy, she seems to be pretty much of a grease-spunky (love the term, BTW), herself. So I suspect that this reaction was exactly what he was going for. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2002, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/35 "2002-09-26T21:35:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Though I have to wonder if Whedon did this on purpose. I’m not super familiar with his other work, so I don’t know if he usually has the flashy gals ruling the roost, but from what I know of Buffy, she seems to be pretty much of a grease-spunky (love the term, BTW), herself. So I suspect that this reaction was exactly what he was going for. Naw, Buffy was more of a Future Prom Queen before her Slayer powers kicked in and all the assorted weirdness that goes with being the Slayer destroyed her social life. And the gym at her first highschool. However, Willow was supposed to be this nerdy, massively unpopular girl, despite the fact that she was _clearly_ twice as hot as Cordelia, who was the most popular girl at Sunnydale High. I think Joss does this on purpose, because by his own accounts he was nerdy and massively unpopular himself, when he was in highschool, and he identifies with those sorts of characters more strongly. One of his producers once said, “If Joss had ever gotten a date in high school, none of us would be here today.” On the other hand, I think there’s a good chance that most of the people in this thread tend to fall on the “nerdy” side of the popularity bell curve. I know I do, at least. And I think that might be a big part of why everyone here likes the grease-spunky more than the high-class whore: she’s more accesible. I could see myself with the cute shy girl more readily than with the gorgeous supermodel. She’s more attractive to me, because I can more easily fool myself into thinking I had a chance with her. Plus, girls who are good with machines really know how to get my motor running, if you know what I mean. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2002, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/36 "2002-09-26T21:37:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Miller \* > \*\* > > most of the people in this thread tend to fall on the “nerdy” side of the popularity bell curve. \*\* Smile when you say that, Pardner. You could have a jet engine accident. You watch your ass. ^:)^ ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [September 26, 2002, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/37 "2002-09-26T22:42:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Menocchio \* > **The low self-esteem “plain” female lead is, in fact, far more desireable to viewers than the sultry (but kind-hearted) “hot” chick, despite what the characters would have us believe.** Like on “Sports Night,” how the low-key brunette was infinitely hotter than the older, higher-profile blonde. ---
**Author:** ![downbylaw](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e9c0ed/32.png) [@downbylaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/downbylaw)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/38 "2002-09-27T03:35:31Z")
ummm, i like the whore. i really like the whore. really. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Angel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d26b3c/32.png) [@Johnny\_Angel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Angel)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/39 "2002-09-27T04:27:22Z")
**downbylaw** wrote: > [@](#): > > ummm, i like the whore. > > i really like the whore. > > really. Nobody is objecting to the whore, except for **ferrous** who thinks she looks like Michael Jackson. I mean, sure, Zing! went the strings of my pants. All we’re saying is that the engineer is dreamy. **Menocchio** quote: > [@](#): > > Yes, it appears that Whedon has fallen into a classic Hollywood trap. The low self-esteem “plain” female lead is, in fact, far more desireable to viewers than the sultry (but kind-hearted) “hot” chick, despite what teh characters would have us believe. _Au contraire mon silly_. In your typical hollywood ugly-duck-cum-swan figure, people actually go around talking about the obviously meltingly hot girl as though she’s ugly. Then, when she takes her glasses off and lets her hair down (if they don’t have the time or budget for a full make-over montage), we’re supposed to believe that everybody is suprised that she turns out to be a secret garden of hotness under their noses the whole time. During the hair brushing sequence, the fact that Kaylie has grease on her face is mentioned not because we’re supposed to think it detracts from her cuteness, but because they know damn well it only makes her cuter. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2002, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181/40 "2002-09-27T12:43:01Z")
Can we drop this cutesy-smutesy stuff and get back to kicking guys into jet engines? Who will be ingested this week? I vote for Jane. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/johnny-angels-review-of-firefly/129181.md?page=3)