Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Wednesday August 17 2016, @04:13AM   Printer-friendly
from the never-give-up-hope dept.

Since its cancellation in 2003, science fiction television series Firefly has achieved a powerful cult status. Interest from the show's loyal fanbase has helped launch a feature film and comic books as means of continuing the series. Fans express continued interest in a series revival, although 13 years out that looks increasingly unlikely.

Animator Stephen Byrne offers a glimpse of what could be: a short teaser trailer for an animated Firefly . There's no dialogue, but all the characters are there doing many of the things you would expect and hope for. Could this lead to an animated Firefly revival? Or is it too late?

Personally, I'd be more likely to shell out for yet another exclusive streaming service for this than for the new Star Trek series...


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @06:53AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @06:53AM (#389031)

    Star Trek TAS had the same actors and writers and script quality as TOS. If you close your eyes, you'd never know it was animated. Unless you're one of those bigots who says, "I heard this is animated, so it must be crap."

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:03AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:03AM (#389036)

    "if you close your eyes" ...
    do you even know what the point of WATCHING tv is?
    I'm sorry if my yelling is shocking, but I think it's called for.
    I'm not qualified to comment on the quality of expressions and other things that cannot be translated from live-action to animation properly, but I can certainly understand that a lot of VISUAL information is lost when doing an animated series. maybe that's exactly what the GP liked about the original series.

    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:22AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:22AM (#389037)

      The acting was so hammy in TOS, I really didn't notice a difference. Yes, I WATCHED the animated series. I saw the raised eyebrows, so shocking. I saw KIRK IS A JERK, how jovial. There were effects in TAS that were easier to do in animation at the time, too. There were more non-humanoid aliens. Arex had three arms and three legs. Bem dismembered himself. There were giant tribbles and the the glommer that hunted them. There were the life-support belts that were so simple to depict in animation that they were never actually used in any live action series or film. The important thing is the animated series was NOT DUMBED DOWN in any way.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:37AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 17 2016, @07:37AM (#389040)

        I tried to emphasize that I'm not judging the quality of the acting. I think in general there was a lot of over-acting or just plain bad acting on all the Star Treks. I was just pointing out that maybe that's what the OP liked (whether they know it or not), since that is a clear difference. and we can't blame anyone for liking something, since taste is purely subjective.
        also, as you point out, writers were no longer restricted by what special effects could be achieved reasonably in a live-action picture. maybe that also introduced noticeable differences in the story lines, losing the stuff that was interesting for the OP.