The other day, I was mourning (for the thousandth time) the loss of the TV series, Firefly.   The loss of its potential, of levels of greatness it can never reach—feels to me like the creative version of the tragic life-cut-short-before-his/her-time.  This show was artistically satisfying, even when it was being cheeky, thanks to things like character/crew chemistry, self-referencing intricacies, and outstanding dialog timing.

Everything blended into a powerful ball of goodness, but the dialog timing impressed me the most, and I wondered if that timing could truly be duplicated in print, or is written timing too dependent on reader preconceptions or tendencies?  Visual clues (along with all the subtle supporting factors, like tone/audible emphasis) make up for much of what registers with us in the video format: facial expressions, stance, even camera angle and background/staging.  Those are mostly lost in our medium (or not lost, really, but not controlled by the writer to the same degree a director would have).

We writers can develop characters as endearing/humorous/complex as a series; we can evoke a similar range of emotions, but we do not have the toolset, and I wonder if that prevents us from developing the level of interaction timing that a video can provide.  Have you guys ever seen literary examples of the timing that you feel is up to par with the timing/delivery of your favorite movie or TV line?  Whether you have or haven’t, why do you think that is?

In any case, the next time my memory fades enough for me to enjoy the Firefly series again (and this is one case where it’s good that I have a shitty memory, heh—I can re-enjoy my favorite books and movies without a bothersome detailed memory to spoil it for me), I will toast those writers, actors and directors, and I will curse the execs who thought it wasn’t teeny-bopper enough (and therefore, not viable).