<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/stylesheets/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/">
  <channel>
    <title>swaits.com: Serenity Sequel? -- Please?!?!?!</title>
    <link>http://www.swaits.com/articles/2005/12/30/serenity-sequel-please</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <description>A Blog by Stephen Waits</description>
    <item>
      <title>Serenity Sequel? -- Please?!?!?!</title>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;A &lt;a href="http://cinematical.com/2005/12/30/serenity-sequel/"&gt;Serenity Sequel&lt;/a&gt; would be my personal heaven.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I recall reading recently though, that Whedon said it was done, over, caput.  Fingers crossed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Via &lt;a href="http://www.cinematical.com"&gt;Cinematical&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2005 17:12:34 -0600</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">urn:uuid:223faaae-ade3-4667-ac94-e668bdd1991b</guid>
      <author>steve@waits.net (Stephen Waits)</author>
      <link>http://www.swaits.com/articles/2005/12/30/serenity-sequel-please</link>
      <category>movies</category>
      <trackback:ping>http://www.swaits.com/articles/trackback/43</trackback:ping>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
