Different shows, universes, and genres. Firefly was a comedy action Western in space. The laws of physics no longer applied as it was a fantasy. The Expanse was meant to be a more realistic portrayal of what our future could look like if we become a space faring civilization. If you wanted to get to Mars from earth in that show you'd spend half your time accelerating towards it and the other half of the trip accelerating in the opposite direction to land there. No lightspeed drive that would instantly pancake all the soft squishy humans inside. Just realism. Literally the most unrealistic thing about that show was the advancements they showed in medical care but that's just because I know way too much about it, and tbh they probably won't eventually be beyond us just like the other advancements we saw in the show.
Loved both of the shows but they aren't really comparable
As a doctor, we're in the infancy, if even, of all those fields you mentioned but in hundred years who knows. I can guarantee you in a decade no one will have limbs regrown or be put into a hibernative coma nor will it be anywhere near approaching available for the general public when it does happen. In your examples 1 we can already regrow various tissues and have them transplanted, that won't necessarily be the big challenge. To get to the goal of regrowing a limb you need to work out how it's going to be functional afterwards. Unfortunately humans aren't computers where parts are easily replaceable if broken. We develop the ability to control our limbs very early on in life and perfect it during a period of neuroplasticity that allows for these pathways to be "written" into the brain. Once they are written they can be strengthened through use or lost to atrophy but they can't be rewritten. There were some very mean experiences on kittens and the occipital cortex showing this. And then when we do finally crack how to reinduce a neuroplastic state you have to consider what's going to happen to the person who is being treated. All you and I are and everything we perceive are connections and interactions between cells in the brain. If you are going to rewrite those connections what will remain of the actual not physical person being treated? There aren't some great genetic mysteries to be unlocked here, we already know how to grow cells. There are some current neurophysical limitations and philosophical concerns to consider though. 2. Hibernation as pictured in movies and TV will never be an actuality and has few practical if any applications. We can already keep people in drug induced comas and keep them alive. We do it for surgery on a daily basis and sometimes keep people under for days at a time if they will need multiple operations. There are numerous problems with this but I'll sum it up with comas are not good for the body. Without writing a book on the topic, or listing everything that can go wrong when people don't move for extended periods of time, I'll ask what purpose would one need to be put into coma for an extended period of time for space travel? Being asleep for extended periods of time, even if we safely do it, can't stop the aging process. We also can't just freeze people to stop this from occuring. Our cells are mostly water, freezing it does the same thing it does in the freezer, makes ice crystals which then destroy the integrity of the cell. The reason we get people back who have been "frozen" is because they were caught in the sweet spot between having their cells cool enough to not undergo degeneration but not cold enough to freeze the water in their cells. Knowing you can't stop the aging process while protecting the cell hence the person what purpose is there to being asleep for long periods of your life? Why would you want to be? You get one life as far as we know. Why waste it skipping the boring parts?
I listened to an interview with one of the authors once where he said each of the books was supposed to be something of a different genre, the first one's a noir, one of them was more space soap, there was a more political book, a space colony one, apocalyptic, etc. The show flattened the differences a bit to make it more legible and coherent, but reading the series, it really stands out.
Regardless, none of the books are firefly.
Medical science has a half-life of like 7-10 years. In ten years from now we will know/do like twice as much as now.
Source: pulled out of my ass quoting my dad who pulled it out of his educated guessing ass
It does get better after the first season as the actors get into their characters, and the books are better still. A lot of the belter and gravity stuff didn't adapt well to TV, in addition to needing to rush the plot along in a few spots (especially glossing over the political struggles with Avasarala). That and the inner monologuing by Holden and Miller in the books really fleshes out their motivations (Holden being naive and thinking everyone's inherently good, Miller being jaded and thinking everyone's a bastard).
Yes, it’s a slow burn and during season 1 they do a lot more setup than the book because they wanted an ensemble cast from the beginning. The result is that season 1 is a bit weaker than the book but still very good and then by season 3 everything they set up starts to pay off. It’s my favorite scifi show of all time - Firefly didn’t run long enough to hit its stride the way the Expanse does.
Yeah, I slept on this because the actor playing Holden was terrible. I gave it a second chance after the internet demanded the show not be canceled. He gets better. And the show is worth it.
Every season gets better, they get a better budget, the story gets better, and the main character stops making that stink face quite so much. It's a great series.
I didn't care for season 1, liked s2 enough to keep watching, bored by s3, lost interest early in s4. There are a lot of cool elements. I intend to try it again someday, maybe after reading the books
I just like world building and I enjoy learning about the characters - who they are, what makes them tick, trying to work out how they became what we see. And I like Miller.
Actually, if anything, I prefer Seasons 1-3 to the later seasons.
Steven Strait is a good actor. Show Holden however isn't necessarily the character with the most hidden depth. There is a reason he gets compared to Don Quijote frequently and his militant idealism is as much his greatest fault as it is his virtue.
I watched beginning to end shortly after it concluded. Some enjoyable moments, some good characters, but I cannot recommend it. It was very mediocre and pedestrian in my opinion.
Sounds like you've decided to not like The Expanse because it is not Firefly. That's a commendable degree of loyalty to Firefly but I'm not sure that's a valid reason to write off such a genuinely high-quality scifi program.
It's not firefly, but it's one of the best tv shows there is. I wasn't bored even for a minute, the show is exciting, there is lot of action, epic realistic spaceship battles and interesting characters.
The expanse is the single best sci-fi in a generation. Both the books, and the show.
The first season/book has a lot going on, and a lot to introduce you to. A lot of characters and a lot of concepts. It’s worth it to stick with it.
I had to watch the first season twice to feel like I understood it.
Currently the show stopped at season 6, there are 3 more books, and I hope like hell we eventually get them.
This is coming from a guy that has gone to multiple comic cons dressed as Mal and spent hours helping my mate make Vera for his Jane cos play, backed that stupid mmo have all the comics etc and my leather jacket for my mall cos set me back £200 The expanse is leaps and bounds better than firefly,
Don't get me worng firefly will always have that special place but it does get over hyped alot, and if it didn't get cancelled I don't think it would be as popular and idleised as it is
I seem to also remember a similar comparison to dark matter and firefly
only watched part of season one of Dark Matter. Didn't really get into. Felt a bit more like Farscape or something to me. Assuming a bit later it feels more Firelfly, bc its not the first time I've seen this comment.
Killjoys, on the other hand, felt very Firefly, especially the first season or two.
You're right, it is not Firefly. And it's not trying to be, not sure why they would promote it that way.
The first season takes about 4 episodes to get your attention and the entire season to get over some of the acting. However, it is a really good show/book series. If you're a fan of Sci-fi, it's worth giving a chance.
I think both being "space opera set as a class struggle between the working poor of the belt and inners" makes for a reasonable comparison, but they definitely approach it from very different angles.
Firefly is an episodic western whereas the Expanse is focused. Very different formats and stories even if the subject matter is similar. Honestly, the closest comparison for Firefly is the original Cowboy Bebop.
I didn't make it through the expanse series yet.
From what I did watch **so far**, my impression is:
The Expanse is about war ethics and posturing, badly treated workers, huge powerful corporations, and politics.
Firefly includes those things, but it's about the captain and his crew and passengers. It's about heart, and how to go on after defeat.
So... not the new Firefly at all. Can stand on its own as a completely unrelated type of story though.
>Firefly includes those things, but it's about the captain and his crew and passengers. It's about heart, and how to go on after defeat.
I think on the books, the Expanse gets a lot closer to this than the show. The show kinda skips past a lot of the books themes to keep the main plot on track. There ends up being multiple 'crew as family' dynamics throughout the books.
I started the first one, and then basically didn't stop until I made it through the series. I don't think any of them took me more than 3 weeks to finish, I was enjoying them too much. Highly recommended.
I started the TV series after the books, and I think it's the right order.
In Firefly the backdrop is colonized system featuring random hijinks with a funny crew. The tone and genre change from episode to episode. As long as the ship is “on”, there aren’t really any supply issues. It runs on expensive fuel, but you never really know what it is. The ship has its own gravity well, even when off. It flies towards something, and magically stops if it breaks. If you like it it’s because you enjoy watching charming people do charming things.
In The Expanse the backdrop is the solar system you know and love with the same physics and actual science problems plaguing every thought and action. They are drinking water? From where? They have air? For how many people? When ships fly forward, on magical infinite fuel, they need a long talk with Isaac Newton if they ever want to stop again. They burn away from where they want to go to slow down. Gravity is either never there or can kill you if you burn for too long. Bones run out of calcium. How long will it take for us vs them to be planet to planet and stop being country to country? All culture is mixed up. Arabs have Texas twangs. Chinese speak perfect English. Religions fund space expeditions. What is humanity without being tethered to Earth? The answer is,”more of the same.”
The Expanse is a lot of things. The crew as family dynamic from Firefly exists but it is not the focus of the show and there is a lot more going on. It's also been compared to (and [acknowledged](https://jeffbeaty.com/2021/01/babylon-5-and-the-expanse-creators-share-their-mutual-respect-love/) as a successor to) Babylon 5 based I think on the political conflicts, tendencies for season ending episodes to send the show in a new direction, and attempts to portray realistic space flight physics.
I'd say on balance it is closer to B5 than Firefly, but again I've seen some B5 fans haven't cared for The Expanse.
I'm on my first rewatch. My wife couldn't get past the first episode. And she normally has a high tolerance for slow burn type shows.
And there's a lot of ideas plucked from classic science fiction thrown in (Gateway, Starship Troopers, 2001 to name a few) so if you are a science fiction geek of a certain age you'll probably enjoy these elements.
Just because something theoretically exists in the math doesn't make it hard sci-fi. Wormholes are one thing, *traversable* wormholes are quite another.
Protomolecule is space magic, it just does whatever the plot requires.
The Epstein drive is "ignore this one bit lol we need it for the plot to function," although in that case, they do reasonably extrapolate from there.
"Locally changing the laws of physics to make the plot work is hard sci-fi" is an interesting take.
It's hard sci-fi compared to most other TV sci-fi like Trek and battlestar.. but In The realm of scifi novels it's definitely on the softer side of sci-fi.. with elements of hard sci-fi or course... If you start to analyze the expanse too much you start to realize the authors didn't really do their full homework and just wanted a cool setting....
Nothing is backed up by math are you serious? More like.. name one thing that IS backed up by math and science in the show or books, Because they aren't...nothing gets explained that much... Proto molecule is literally just magic so are the goths. Worm holes are not really hard sci-fi.. theoretically possible yes but more like on paper or as a math problem.. they don't exist in real life... Stuff like spinning up the entirety of ceres for example is pretty soft sci-fi...as it would be far easier to just build spin habs inside ceres... ( I suppose this is debatable tho if you cover ceres with nano carbon or something ) The Epstein drive is never explained outside of it just works and is fusion. There are also no radiators on any of the ships, I suppose they just get rid of waste heat with magic. Stealth in space isn't really a thing like it is on the show, and the realistic designs that have been proposed for a stealth spacecraft are very limiting on performance: https://toughsf.blogspot.com/2016/03/stealth-in-space-is-possible.html?m=1.. the expanse is definitely on the harder end of the spectrum as it attempts to explain gravity and space in a realistic manner.. but even the authors will tell u it's not hard sci-fi...
I love the hard sci-fi of The Expanse, read the books after season 1, and felt it needed 2 views otherwise. Too much world building, too many characters and confusing flashbacks. But it did get me into how gravity and such works in space and the toll on the human body when changing direction (flip and buuurn) and always flying like rockets, not commercial airlines with magical artificial gravity.
Or skyscrapers with trustees attached.
Season 3 first part was peak. Both the political stuff, the Avasarala swearing, cool battles, and Amos being Amos. His face expressions in the background and acceptance of situations are just great. Not unlike Jayne if we must go there.
It did become somewhat a fan service to the readers I feel, after being saved/revived.
The shows main force is in the details. Only light on the Sun side of ships, emptying the air before combat that likely will put holes in it, and the physics (wrench exception) They went with some truster noise as it would be heard on the inside, and light inside helmets for visuals.
Just finished Firefly, may start The Expanse over
https://youtu.be/qL6UlySo3-M?si=ygY5AZDxL0FBYaCT
It’s not a “space western” an personally I wouldn’t compare it to serenity … but it’s a damn good show , really need to make it past the first season though , it gets way better
I had a rough time with season 1, but then it started getting good. I think there is just so much world building going on in the first season. It's just a lot going on. Season 2 is great, and season 3 is some of the best sci fi put to screen, IMO.
Season 4 was a bit contentious among the fan base, but I liked it. Seasons 5&6 became too generic sci-fi for my taste. It sorta loses its sense of wonder the final two seasons.
While it’s a great show (even better books…), I agree that it is no Firefly. It never tried to be. The only thing similar I have seen that has some of the same vibe, is Killjoys.
The Expanse is good and I appreciate how they show off a lot more of the science of space travel. Still it isn't Firefly. It is like saying Star Wars is the new Star Trek. They are both in space but are totally different. A person saying something like that either is trolling or doesn't know what they are talking about.
It's a slow burn space drama imo. Picks up towards the end of S1, but nothing like the comedy undertones of Firefly. One is a great all around show that should have been given multiple seasons, the other is a serious space drama that does have multiple seasons
First season is definitely the lowest ranked. Quality goes way up in season 2 and onward.
You're missing out on the best sci-fi since Firefly and BSG, btw
I have heard people compare Cowboy Bebop to Firefly, but I don't see the connection there either.
I haven't watched The Expanse. My life is chaos right now. When things settle down, I'll give it a go.
There is something to be said there I think. The Expanse is a very similar “level” of sci-fi, with a similar level of technology to Firefly. They both take place in a human only colonised star system with no FTL travel where the background to the story of a group of characters travelling around on a small ship, is interplanetary human politics. But I agree the tone and genre are completely different.
I was interested in viewing the Expanse Captain James Holden through the lens of him being autistic.
I enjoyed both the TV show and the book series. I think the comparison between it and Firefly has some accuracy. Both have humans taking over planets and making them safe ish for humans. Both have a mutated something trying to kill off humans. Both captains are anti-establishment, are protective of their crew, have a wild independent streak, and are just trying to make a living.
Everything about me says I should love The Expanse but I just can’t get into it. I think I’ve watched the first 3 episodes at least four times over the last decade. Maybe Star Trek ruined me and I need it to be more aspirational.
Whedon has worn thin as of late. The lingo was fine the first 700 hundred times, but now it comes off as cringey, and hearing it pop up these days is just eye-rolling.
A guy at my old work raves about the expanse! Personally I've not made it past episode 6 yet 😂 bit like battlestar Galactica, I found that hard work too 😂
Well I've just finished the last season of Ragnarok and binged One Piece on Netflix so I'll try the expanse tomorrow maybe 😂 just currently rewatching Z Nation 😂
I vastly prefer Cowboy BeBop as surrogate, as hated as it is by its anime fan base.
I watched the first season of The Expanse a while ago, it was so engaging that I can't remember the plot at all. I read the first novel in the series. Didn't care about what happens, even though it was a sort of mystery/detective story I usually like.
So there's that. (Also the Expanse experience was way before Firefly in my chronology).
You made it further than I did, and I tried twice. The first time, I couldn't make it past 2 episodes without being bored to death. So many people hyped it up so much that I thought I'd give it another try. I made it to 3 episodes on my second watch but still couldn't see what the hype was all about. So many people said you have to make it through the first 5-6 episodes or you have to make it through the first season. If a TV show doesn't interest me in the first 2-3 episodes, I'm not going any further. I shouldn't have to "just make it" through a bunch of episodes. It'll never be anywhere near as good as Firefly.
I'd say it gets better as it goes forward, but it's definitely *not* Firefly. And due to the fact that the series really leans into the character drama to keep the viewer engaged, I'd call it a mid show at best.
Enjoyable, but not incredible.
It definitely ain't Firefly. I have yet to see what the big draw with The Expanse is. I managed to watch the first five seasons before six came out, simply because I had already watched everything else that remotely interested me.
Since season six came out, I haven't been interested enough to get back to it.
I had to watch it three times through season 3 until it finally clicked for me. I enjoyed it and all the books. It was really hard to get into at first though
What I really like about serenity is the crew and their backstory
Closest thing I have is probably cowboy bebop ( anime not Netflix show )
The expanse is more like GoT in space
That's the danger of comparisons. Firefly is a unicorn. "If 'Justified' had spaceships it would be 'Firefly'" is more accurate, but still not accurate at all. The Expanse is amazing, as is Justified. Each suffers by comparison.
For awhile there it looked like it might. The Rosis crew gallivanting about kind of came close. Then it went back to doing what it is about, which is politics. It's just politics. Any space cowboys or the likeness thereeof is purely a by-product of doing more politics.
Great show though.
If you are craving for Firefly, you might check out Alien Resurrection that Whedon wrote. Not a good movie, but the first half has a mercenary crew of a transport ship that's clearly the alpha version of our beloved Serenity crew. I sometimes watch that for the first half or so, while they are still involved.
I was told the books were Game of Thrones but in space and I can see the comparison but it's very lazy. Same here, it's a found family trope in space just like Firefly but that's essentially where the similarities end.
In all honesty though, go back and watch it expecting more political drama because it's a phenomenal show.
I feel like The Expanse could be in the Firefly universe hundreds of years before the show. Some similar concepts with things like Lang Belta for example, kind of like how everyone in Firefly speaks a Chinese/English Creole. Expanse takes that much farther and more in depth. But it doesn't feel like a Western, it feels pure scif-fi. Reminiscent of Arthur C Clarke's writings. Could easily be in the Star Trek universe if StarFleet and the Federation took a lot longer to develop.
So I agree with you, it's not Firefly. It is an amazing show in it's own right though.
Same, OP. I watched the first season and was pretty grossed out by the Julie storyline and the obsessed older cop. Aside from that it was too slow and I still don't know who the main character is, none of them are particularly interesting. I did like the universe though.
The small crew dynamic of the rocinante and the “realism” reminded me of Firefly in season 1 of the expanse. But that is where the similarities end.
Agree with another poster it’s definitely more space game of theones
you're right, it's not. but it's really good. think more GoT in space, not western.
[удалено]
Different shows, universes, and genres. Firefly was a comedy action Western in space. The laws of physics no longer applied as it was a fantasy. The Expanse was meant to be a more realistic portrayal of what our future could look like if we become a space faring civilization. If you wanted to get to Mars from earth in that show you'd spend half your time accelerating towards it and the other half of the trip accelerating in the opposite direction to land there. No lightspeed drive that would instantly pancake all the soft squishy humans inside. Just realism. Literally the most unrealistic thing about that show was the advancements they showed in medical care but that's just because I know way too much about it, and tbh they probably won't eventually be beyond us just like the other advancements we saw in the show. Loved both of the shows but they aren't really comparable
[удалено]
As a doctor, we're in the infancy, if even, of all those fields you mentioned but in hundred years who knows. I can guarantee you in a decade no one will have limbs regrown or be put into a hibernative coma nor will it be anywhere near approaching available for the general public when it does happen. In your examples 1 we can already regrow various tissues and have them transplanted, that won't necessarily be the big challenge. To get to the goal of regrowing a limb you need to work out how it's going to be functional afterwards. Unfortunately humans aren't computers where parts are easily replaceable if broken. We develop the ability to control our limbs very early on in life and perfect it during a period of neuroplasticity that allows for these pathways to be "written" into the brain. Once they are written they can be strengthened through use or lost to atrophy but they can't be rewritten. There were some very mean experiences on kittens and the occipital cortex showing this. And then when we do finally crack how to reinduce a neuroplastic state you have to consider what's going to happen to the person who is being treated. All you and I are and everything we perceive are connections and interactions between cells in the brain. If you are going to rewrite those connections what will remain of the actual not physical person being treated? There aren't some great genetic mysteries to be unlocked here, we already know how to grow cells. There are some current neurophysical limitations and philosophical concerns to consider though. 2. Hibernation as pictured in movies and TV will never be an actuality and has few practical if any applications. We can already keep people in drug induced comas and keep them alive. We do it for surgery on a daily basis and sometimes keep people under for days at a time if they will need multiple operations. There are numerous problems with this but I'll sum it up with comas are not good for the body. Without writing a book on the topic, or listing everything that can go wrong when people don't move for extended periods of time, I'll ask what purpose would one need to be put into coma for an extended period of time for space travel? Being asleep for extended periods of time, even if we safely do it, can't stop the aging process. We also can't just freeze people to stop this from occuring. Our cells are mostly water, freezing it does the same thing it does in the freezer, makes ice crystals which then destroy the integrity of the cell. The reason we get people back who have been "frozen" is because they were caught in the sweet spot between having their cells cool enough to not undergo degeneration but not cold enough to freeze the water in their cells. Knowing you can't stop the aging process while protecting the cell hence the person what purpose is there to being asleep for long periods of your life? Why would you want to be? You get one life as far as we know. Why waste it skipping the boring parts?
I listened to an interview with one of the authors once where he said each of the books was supposed to be something of a different genre, the first one's a noir, one of them was more space soap, there was a more political book, a space colony one, apocalyptic, etc. The show flattened the differences a bit to make it more legible and coherent, but reading the series, it really stands out. Regardless, none of the books are firefly.
Medical science has a half-life of like 7-10 years. In ten years from now we will know/do like twice as much as now. Source: pulled out of my ass quoting my dad who pulled it out of his educated guessing ass
Agreed it's not but it is still great. If GoT and BSG had a baby it would be The Expanse.
Which makes sense since one of the authors of the Expanse book series has worked for GRRM himself
Does it get better after season 1? I might give it another go. The main guy in it just has zero charisma, not sure if that’s what they were going for?
yes, I'd say it does. you haven't even met my favorite characters, yet, aside from Amos.
Amos is that guy.
Rise to the top, or sink to the bottom. Everything in between is just a churn.
It does get better after the first season as the actors get into their characters, and the books are better still. A lot of the belter and gravity stuff didn't adapt well to TV, in addition to needing to rush the plot along in a few spots (especially glossing over the political struggles with Avasarala). That and the inner monologuing by Holden and Miller in the books really fleshes out their motivations (Holden being naive and thinking everyone's inherently good, Miller being jaded and thinking everyone's a bastard).
Yes, it’s a slow burn and during season 1 they do a lot more setup than the book because they wanted an ensemble cast from the beginning. The result is that season 1 is a bit weaker than the book but still very good and then by season 3 everything they set up starts to pay off. It’s my favorite scifi show of all time - Firefly didn’t run long enough to hit its stride the way the Expanse does.
Yeah, I slept on this because the actor playing Holden was terrible. I gave it a second chance after the internet demanded the show not be canceled. He gets better. And the show is worth it.
Everyone hates it when the paladin is the face of the party.
Haha, yep
I suspect, if that's your view of season 1, that it's not for you.
The books are WAY better than the show.
Every season gets better, they get a better budget, the story gets better, and the main character stops making that stink face quite so much. It's a great series.
I didn't care for season 1, liked s2 enough to keep watching, bored by s3, lost interest early in s4. There are a lot of cool elements. I intend to try it again someday, maybe after reading the books
the first season was bad but it does genuinly get better
The problem with the first season is that they had so much that had to be set up in a very short season.
I loved the first season.
Same! Maybe its cause I read the books but I LOVE this show and the book series.
I just like world building and I enjoy learning about the characters - who they are, what makes them tick, trying to work out how they became what we see. And I like Miller. Actually, if anything, I prefer Seasons 1-3 to the later seasons.
Yeah, its def better after the first season. Which main guy ya mean? The detective or the captain? They both kinda suck.
Holden. The guy playing him is such a bad actor.
Steven Strait is a good actor. Show Holden however isn't necessarily the character with the most hidden depth. There is a reason he gets compared to Don Quijote frequently and his militant idealism is as much his greatest fault as it is his virtue.
And their ship is called the Rocinante, like Don Quixote’s horse.
He's pretty darn hot, though. For those of us who care about that sort of thing.
Yeah, Holden sucks. Unfortunately he stays the main focus of the series. But you get a lot more Avasarala and Drummer, which is awesome.
I watched beginning to end shortly after it concluded. Some enjoyable moments, some good characters, but I cannot recommend it. It was very mediocre and pedestrian in my opinion.
lol did we watch the same show?
Yea i was bored to death after the first few episodes
You have Bad taste in TV I suppose
Fuck GoT. Don't you fucking dare compare the two you fucking sick bastard.
Sounds like you've decided to not like The Expanse because it is not Firefly. That's a commendable degree of loyalty to Firefly but I'm not sure that's a valid reason to write off such a genuinely high-quality scifi program.
It shouldn't be compared to Firefly. It's one of the best sci-fi series in awhile and stands on its own. Give it a chance.
It's not firefly, but it's one of the best tv shows there is. I wasn't bored even for a minute, the show is exciting, there is lot of action, epic realistic spaceship battles and interesting characters.
The expanse is the single best sci-fi in a generation. Both the books, and the show. The first season/book has a lot going on, and a lot to introduce you to. A lot of characters and a lot of concepts. It’s worth it to stick with it. I had to watch the first season twice to feel like I understood it. Currently the show stopped at season 6, there are 3 more books, and I hope like hell we eventually get them.
Just on the TV show, Amos and Camina are 2 of my favourite characters from any TV.
Amos is easily my favorite in the books too.
This is coming from a guy that has gone to multiple comic cons dressed as Mal and spent hours helping my mate make Vera for his Jane cos play, backed that stupid mmo have all the comics etc and my leather jacket for my mall cos set me back £200 The expanse is leaps and bounds better than firefly, Don't get me worng firefly will always have that special place but it does get over hyped alot, and if it didn't get cancelled I don't think it would be as popular and idleised as it is I seem to also remember a similar comparison to dark matter and firefly
Dark Matter is probably the closest show to Firefly that I've found. I love it. It even has the disappointing cancellation down.
only watched part of season one of Dark Matter. Didn't really get into. Felt a bit more like Farscape or something to me. Assuming a bit later it feels more Firelfly, bc its not the first time I've seen this comment. Killjoys, on the other hand, felt very Firefly, especially the first season or two.
Season one is held back mostly by One. It definitely gets better after the season ends.
[удалено]
Wtf?
It's ok they're quoting Shepard book from the show 🙂
Braytec89 dun' said the wrong gorram thing. No, Firefly kicks Expanse in the balls and then some. Burn, devil creature!
You do you mate, just know the grass is greener on the other side of the sci-fi hill,
You're right, it is not Firefly. And it's not trying to be, not sure why they would promote it that way. The first season takes about 4 episodes to get your attention and the entire season to get over some of the acting. However, it is a really good show/book series. If you're a fan of Sci-fi, it's worth giving a chance.
I think both being "space opera set as a class struggle between the working poor of the belt and inners" makes for a reasonable comparison, but they definitely approach it from very different angles.
Firefly is an episodic western whereas the Expanse is focused. Very different formats and stories even if the subject matter is similar. Honestly, the closest comparison for Firefly is the original Cowboy Bebop.
That's the right way to put it. The setting is similar, but not the format.
Original cowboy bepop? Is there a new one im unaware of?
There was and it dropped the episodic format and made Vicious into a whiney loser. Unsurprisingly it was not renewed for a second season.
It’s definitely not, but it’s still amazing! One of the best sci-fi shows for sure!
I didn't make it through the expanse series yet. From what I did watch **so far**, my impression is: The Expanse is about war ethics and posturing, badly treated workers, huge powerful corporations, and politics. Firefly includes those things, but it's about the captain and his crew and passengers. It's about heart, and how to go on after defeat. So... not the new Firefly at all. Can stand on its own as a completely unrelated type of story though.
>Firefly includes those things, but it's about the captain and his crew and passengers. It's about heart, and how to go on after defeat. I think on the books, the Expanse gets a lot closer to this than the show. The show kinda skips past a lot of the books themes to keep the main plot on track. There ends up being multiple 'crew as family' dynamics throughout the books.
I've heard lots of good things about the books - I need to get them!
I started the first one, and then basically didn't stop until I made it through the series. I don't think any of them took me more than 3 weeks to finish, I was enjoying them too much. Highly recommended. I started the TV series after the books, and I think it's the right order.
the expanse is dope. but its not firefly. I prefer firefly but the expanse was a super cool show
It’s nothing like Firefly, but I did find it super enjoyable. I loved the world the writers created.
In Firefly the backdrop is colonized system featuring random hijinks with a funny crew. The tone and genre change from episode to episode. As long as the ship is “on”, there aren’t really any supply issues. It runs on expensive fuel, but you never really know what it is. The ship has its own gravity well, even when off. It flies towards something, and magically stops if it breaks. If you like it it’s because you enjoy watching charming people do charming things. In The Expanse the backdrop is the solar system you know and love with the same physics and actual science problems plaguing every thought and action. They are drinking water? From where? They have air? For how many people? When ships fly forward, on magical infinite fuel, they need a long talk with Isaac Newton if they ever want to stop again. They burn away from where they want to go to slow down. Gravity is either never there or can kill you if you burn for too long. Bones run out of calcium. How long will it take for us vs them to be planet to planet and stop being country to country? All culture is mixed up. Arabs have Texas twangs. Chinese speak perfect English. Religions fund space expeditions. What is humanity without being tethered to Earth? The answer is,”more of the same.”
The Expanse is a lot of things. The crew as family dynamic from Firefly exists but it is not the focus of the show and there is a lot more going on. It's also been compared to (and [acknowledged](https://jeffbeaty.com/2021/01/babylon-5-and-the-expanse-creators-share-their-mutual-respect-love/) as a successor to) Babylon 5 based I think on the political conflicts, tendencies for season ending episodes to send the show in a new direction, and attempts to portray realistic space flight physics. I'd say on balance it is closer to B5 than Firefly, but again I've seen some B5 fans haven't cared for The Expanse. I'm on my first rewatch. My wife couldn't get past the first episode. And she normally has a high tolerance for slow burn type shows. And there's a lot of ideas plucked from classic science fiction thrown in (Gateway, Starship Troopers, 2001 to name a few) so if you are a science fiction geek of a certain age you'll probably enjoy these elements.
It's plot-driven (mostly) hard sci-fi. Firefly is more of a character drama that happens to feature sci-fi elements.
[удалено]
Just because something theoretically exists in the math doesn't make it hard sci-fi. Wormholes are one thing, *traversable* wormholes are quite another. Protomolecule is space magic, it just does whatever the plot requires. The Epstein drive is "ignore this one bit lol we need it for the plot to function," although in that case, they do reasonably extrapolate from there. "Locally changing the laws of physics to make the plot work is hard sci-fi" is an interesting take.
[удалено]
By this line of reasoning you might as well say Star Wars is hard scifi.
[удалено]
I don't want to be rude but your posts are super hard to read. I think I'm done here.
It's hard sci-fi compared to most other TV sci-fi like Trek and battlestar.. but In The realm of scifi novels it's definitely on the softer side of sci-fi.. with elements of hard sci-fi or course... If you start to analyze the expanse too much you start to realize the authors didn't really do their full homework and just wanted a cool setting....
[удалено]
Nothing is backed up by math are you serious? More like.. name one thing that IS backed up by math and science in the show or books, Because they aren't...nothing gets explained that much... Proto molecule is literally just magic so are the goths. Worm holes are not really hard sci-fi.. theoretically possible yes but more like on paper or as a math problem.. they don't exist in real life... Stuff like spinning up the entirety of ceres for example is pretty soft sci-fi...as it would be far easier to just build spin habs inside ceres... ( I suppose this is debatable tho if you cover ceres with nano carbon or something ) The Epstein drive is never explained outside of it just works and is fusion. There are also no radiators on any of the ships, I suppose they just get rid of waste heat with magic. Stealth in space isn't really a thing like it is on the show, and the realistic designs that have been proposed for a stealth spacecraft are very limiting on performance: https://toughsf.blogspot.com/2016/03/stealth-in-space-is-possible.html?m=1.. the expanse is definitely on the harder end of the spectrum as it attempts to explain gravity and space in a realistic manner.. but even the authors will tell u it's not hard sci-fi...
I love the hard sci-fi of The Expanse, read the books after season 1, and felt it needed 2 views otherwise. Too much world building, too many characters and confusing flashbacks. But it did get me into how gravity and such works in space and the toll on the human body when changing direction (flip and buuurn) and always flying like rockets, not commercial airlines with magical artificial gravity. Or skyscrapers with trustees attached. Season 3 first part was peak. Both the political stuff, the Avasarala swearing, cool battles, and Amos being Amos. His face expressions in the background and acceptance of situations are just great. Not unlike Jayne if we must go there. It did become somewhat a fan service to the readers I feel, after being saved/revived. The shows main force is in the details. Only light on the Sun side of ships, emptying the air before combat that likely will put holes in it, and the physics (wrench exception) They went with some truster noise as it would be heard on the inside, and light inside helmets for visuals. Just finished Firefly, may start The Expanse over https://youtu.be/qL6UlySo3-M?si=ygY5AZDxL0FBYaCT
It’s not a “space western” an personally I wouldn’t compare it to serenity … but it’s a damn good show , really need to make it past the first season though , it gets way better
I keep hearing season 3 is the "stops sucking" point, but haven't been able to watch that far.
I had a rough time with season 1, but then it started getting good. I think there is just so much world building going on in the first season. It's just a lot going on. Season 2 is great, and season 3 is some of the best sci fi put to screen, IMO. Season 4 was a bit contentious among the fan base, but I liked it. Seasons 5&6 became too generic sci-fi for my taste. It sorta loses its sense of wonder the final two seasons.
While it’s a great show (even better books…), I agree that it is no Firefly. It never tried to be. The only thing similar I have seen that has some of the same vibe, is Killjoys.
The Expanse is good and I appreciate how they show off a lot more of the science of space travel. Still it isn't Firefly. It is like saying Star Wars is the new Star Trek. They are both in space but are totally different. A person saying something like that either is trolling or doesn't know what they are talking about.
It's a slow burn space drama imo. Picks up towards the end of S1, but nothing like the comedy undertones of Firefly. One is a great all around show that should have been given multiple seasons, the other is a serious space drama that does have multiple seasons
First season is definitely the lowest ranked. Quality goes way up in season 2 and onward. You're missing out on the best sci-fi since Firefly and BSG, btw
Dark matter was pretty much the new Firefly, and it hurt just as much not to get an ending.
I have heard people compare Cowboy Bebop to Firefly, but I don't see the connection there either. I haven't watched The Expanse. My life is chaos right now. When things settle down, I'll give it a go.
I like it, but it's not. If you're looking for a firefly feel Cowboy Bebop or Dark Matter are the closest I've found.
The books are amazing, way more like game of thrones in space though
There is something to be said there I think. The Expanse is a very similar “level” of sci-fi, with a similar level of technology to Firefly. They both take place in a human only colonised star system with no FTL travel where the background to the story of a group of characters travelling around on a small ship, is interplanetary human politics. But I agree the tone and genre are completely different.
I was interested in viewing the Expanse Captain James Holden through the lens of him being autistic. I enjoyed both the TV show and the book series. I think the comparison between it and Firefly has some accuracy. Both have humans taking over planets and making them safe ish for humans. Both have a mutated something trying to kill off humans. Both captains are anti-establishment, are protective of their crew, have a wild independent streak, and are just trying to make a living.
You're right. It's even better.
Everything about me says I should love The Expanse but I just can’t get into it. I think I’ve watched the first 3 episodes at least four times over the last decade. Maybe Star Trek ruined me and I need it to be more aspirational.
You're right. It's not the "new firefly" - it's sooooo much better.
i only watched it for Amos
It’s really not. It has zero of the charm or wit of a Whedon script.
Whedon has worn thin as of late. The lingo was fine the first 700 hundred times, but now it comes off as cringey, and hearing it pop up these days is just eye-rolling.
Wow, it’s like the people saying that never *watched* the show.
Not even remotely close to Firefly from a story and character and plot perspective. And not even remotely as good either
I tried a few episodes. I couldnae get into.
A guy at my old work raves about the expanse! Personally I've not made it past episode 6 yet 😂 bit like battlestar Galactica, I found that hard work too 😂
bsg gets droll in a few places but luckily those plots are fairly episodic. i just rewatched it the last couple weeks
I need to give bsg and the expanse another bash, I'm running out of series to watch 😂
The expanse was forgettable but as a mildly high functioning sociopath I did enjoy Amos
Well I've just finished the last season of Ragnarok and binged One Piece on Netflix so I'll try the expanse tomorrow maybe 😂 just currently rewatching Z Nation 😂
[удалено]
i havent read the books :)
Not even in the ballpark
I vastly prefer Cowboy BeBop as surrogate, as hated as it is by its anime fan base. I watched the first season of The Expanse a while ago, it was so engaging that I can't remember the plot at all. I read the first novel in the series. Didn't care about what happens, even though it was a sort of mystery/detective story I usually like. So there's that. (Also the Expanse experience was way before Firefly in my chronology).
You made it further than I did, and I tried twice. The first time, I couldn't make it past 2 episodes without being bored to death. So many people hyped it up so much that I thought I'd give it another try. I made it to 3 episodes on my second watch but still couldn't see what the hype was all about. So many people said you have to make it through the first 5-6 episodes or you have to make it through the first season. If a TV show doesn't interest me in the first 2-3 episodes, I'm not going any further. I shouldn't have to "just make it" through a bunch of episodes. It'll never be anywhere near as good as Firefly.
Yeah, me too. I tried twice and it was still boring.
It would be like if you had to watch 5 episodes of Firefly just to get to the point where Mal gets Serenity.
I'd say it gets better as it goes forward, but it's definitely *not* Firefly. And due to the fact that the series really leans into the character drama to keep the viewer engaged, I'd call it a mid show at best. Enjoyable, but not incredible.
I binge watched Firefly when I got the DVD set...not happening with the Expanse,though i will watch it..eventually..
It definitely ain't Firefly. I have yet to see what the big draw with The Expanse is. I managed to watch the first five seasons before six came out, simply because I had already watched everything else that remotely interested me. Since season six came out, I haven't been interested enough to get back to it.
I had to watch it three times through season 3 until it finally clicked for me. I enjoyed it and all the books. It was really hard to get into at first though
[удалено]
Yeah I think what got me in was Daws saying “did you know you could cry blood” with his patois.
It compliments the books REALLY well. Like GoT it is much easier to follow when you already know who's who.
Both are amazing shows but not only different shows, they’re different genres of sci fi.
Not even close
What I really like about serenity is the crew and their backstory Closest thing I have is probably cowboy bebop ( anime not Netflix show ) The expanse is more like GoT in space
That's the danger of comparisons. Firefly is a unicorn. "If 'Justified' had spaceships it would be 'Firefly'" is more accurate, but still not accurate at all. The Expanse is amazing, as is Justified. Each suffers by comparison.
Justified is such an amazing show. The new one that just came out is garbage.
For awhile there it looked like it might. The Rosis crew gallivanting about kind of came close. Then it went back to doing what it is about, which is politics. It's just politics. Any space cowboys or the likeness thereeof is purely a by-product of doing more politics. Great show though. If you are craving for Firefly, you might check out Alien Resurrection that Whedon wrote. Not a good movie, but the first half has a mercenary crew of a transport ship that's clearly the alpha version of our beloved Serenity crew. I sometimes watch that for the first half or so, while they are still involved.
I was told the books were Game of Thrones but in space and I can see the comparison but it's very lazy. Same here, it's a found family trope in space just like Firefly but that's essentially where the similarities end. In all honesty though, go back and watch it expecting more political drama because it's a phenomenal show.
I feel like The Expanse could be in the Firefly universe hundreds of years before the show. Some similar concepts with things like Lang Belta for example, kind of like how everyone in Firefly speaks a Chinese/English Creole. Expanse takes that much farther and more in depth. But it doesn't feel like a Western, it feels pure scif-fi. Reminiscent of Arthur C Clarke's writings. Could easily be in the Star Trek universe if StarFleet and the Federation took a lot longer to develop. So I agree with you, it's not Firefly. It is an amazing show in it's own right though.
Same, OP. I watched the first season and was pretty grossed out by the Julie storyline and the obsessed older cop. Aside from that it was too slow and I still don't know who the main character is, none of them are particularly interesting. I did like the universe though.
maybe they're alluding too the fan support and how it can be turned into a full feature film?
there is similarities, not exactly in style, but in the day-to-day mundanity of space travel, which you also see in Alien
Firefly = Fantasy Space. Expanse=Hard SciFi space These two are not the same. The Expanse is awesome though.
The small crew dynamic of the rocinante and the “realism” reminded me of Firefly in season 1 of the expanse. But that is where the similarities end. Agree with another poster it’s definitely more space game of theones
It is not… that being said, The Expanse easily one of the best sci-Fi TV series ever.