Here's how it was

Lee Goldberg's blog features a good debate over Serenity. To summarize, Lee writes:

It's a one-joke/one-conceit concept (a "western in space, with cowboy dialogue and everything, pardner") that doesn't go any where beyond that.

I commented:

While there was some joking in Firefly/Serenity, at heart it was the story of Mal Reynolds's life after losing everything he believed in/fought for. The show and movie weren't about good vs. evil. Unlike the Star Wars Rebels, Mal wasn't trying to beat back the Alliance. He had no grand plan except to keep his spirit from bending to Alliance rule.

The secret at the center of the movie wasn't earth-shattering in the larger scheme of things. Mal's purpose was simply to reveal something the Alliance had covered up. This way people would have more information with which to make their own decisions.

Moviegoers might not "get" any of this and still enjoy Serenity as a western in space with cowboy dialogue. Maybe it doesn't go beyond that, but does it have to?

I don't doubt there are many people not into Firefly. Its ratings speak to that. I'm not sure why certain shows appeal to me and others don't. I like the concept of the new [Battlestar] Galactica, but I can't get into it. Does the new show hold to some darker, more serious intention of the original creators, ala Batman Begins? Why not create a whole new concept and avoid comparisons to an old show? I could go for that.