f13.net

For those of you who like bubbly frothy interviews with your entertainment heros... (http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1109313,00.html)


You know who you are!

Ugh.

It hurts, but I agree with Strazos. I wouldn't even have them on my top 10 in terms of interesting people creating pop culture.

Heh.


Heh.


Heh.

It hurts more to say that I actually like Alias. I grimace as I type this.

Oops.

I never really liked Buffy or Angel that much, but Firefly is excellent, so Joss is okay in my book.

And I pretty much love everything Neil Gaiman has ever done, so no complaints there either.

That's about all I have to say on the matter.

Joss Whedon is ok...he's kind of a one trick pony though. All his stuff is done with the same characters in the same tone. I don't find that tone particularly interesting, but at least he has his own voice.

I prefer a singular vision, even a bad one, to a watered-down corporatized mish-mash. The point about the age of scripts is funny because of how true it is. Some things do no get better with age. It's the same with most games actually. Usually when a game is delayed again and agian, it's no because the finished product is getting that much better. There are companies that are exceptions, but in general if something is taking a lot longer than anticipated it's because something has good horribly wrong, and chances of the ship getting righted are low.

Not sure I agree with the "same characters in same tone" statement. I've only been exposed to Angel, Buffy, and Firefly and they really don't seem that much the same to me.

I've only recently read Neil Gaimon (Neverwhere) and really liked it, but I think they accidently got the wrong Neil. Stephenson is the guy the want. (Might as well throw William Gibson in too, for ships and giggles).

I never watched Firefly.  Sci-Fi without a fantasy element generally isn't my thing.

That said, watching the commercials and listening to the main character have conversations like, "You wanna fly this ship?" "Yes." "Well... you can't." STRONGLY remind me of Angel.

I generally do like his sense of humor, though, and he knows how to keep me interested, so I'm okay with him.  His shows don't have a ton of rewatch value, though.  I can't really watch Buffy at all anymore.  Not because it's a bad show, but I've already sucked out just about all the entertainment I can.  (I'd still like to see the nightmare episode where the first Slayer haunts the gang's dreams though... I never really did just sit and watch that one through the whole way.  It seems very funny, though, and I'd like to catch it again.)

I still don't get the cheeseman.  But he makes me laugh.

Like I've said in other threads, at least get the first disc on Netflix. You'll want to watch the other ones.

Firefly has just as much 'fantasy' as Battlestar Galactica, actually more, so I don't think you will be disappointed.

I've never really understood the fascination with any of those shows... then again, I did watch a Black Adder (http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/guide/articles/b/blackadderthe_7770760.shtml) marathon the other night.

I think I need help.

Your appreciation of Black Adder marks you as a cultured sophisticated man of our times.

Black Adder rocks the motherfucking house, biznatches. Any man who does not agree does not know the meaning of the word wit.

I never could get into Buffy or Angel, but I love me some Firefly. As for Gaiman, his writing is good, but it always seems to have this wistful, dreamy, fairy-tale quality that sometimes just doesn't fit the characters. Or more accurately, he's not something I'm always in the mood for.

But Sandman was teh r0xX0r.

It's people like you that make pretty thigs like Planescape:Torment and Fallout flop.

Baby Jesus hates you.

Angel takes a while to get into.   I didn't watch any of it until the last few episodes, and it inrigued me.  So I watched the whole series on TNT and enjoyed it.   Buffy, however, I still have a devout refusal to watch because I despise SMP and the whole premise of taking the movie and turning it from a pretty amusing dark comedy into this brooding teen drama still bothers me.

Black Adder has a 5-disk set out.  It's got all the seasons plus the mini-movie Black Adder V.  I highly recommend picking it up.

I didn't watch Battlestar Galactica either.

Let me rephrase.

Sci-Fi generally isn't my thing.

But but but... he's carrying a +2 Fantasy claymore!!!

(http://blitzgal.com/blitz_farscape_dargo001.jpg)

Pfft, I've never watched Firefly either, and have no particular desire to.

And I bought both of those games on launch, so Ha.

I wasn't a PC Gamer when those came out.  I was, at best, a casual console gamer.

I like all things Joss.  I was hooked on Buffy at the second episode.

You're aware that the film is really not what Whedon intended ?  And he's gone on record countless times about that ?

Given that I've made an effort to avoid anything "Buffy" related.  Nope, didn't know.

Still prefer the film's "vision."

Well.... YOU DO NOW !!!

(rereading my post - which I didn't before - and I think it sounds patronising as hell.  Heh.)

Whedon says he didn't like the finished product and he certainly didn't like the changes made to his original script.

In the first episode of Buffy, Principal Flutie makes reference to her 'blowing up the last school'.  This is something she actually did in Whedon's original script for the movie, but the studio cut it.

I'm sure some other sad-sack on this board can point you to interviews where he talks about it.

What can I say, Whedon = good. I'll be there Friday night.

Actually, I'm pretty suprised by the sheer amount of advertising that Serenity is getting. its all over the TV and Radio here.

Black Adder still ranks as my all time favorite British comedy, and I'm a fan of a fair number of these.

I never got into Buffy or Angel. In fact, the two episodes of Angel I saw? God, I thought they were terrible.

I watched the first disk of Firefly, and actually liked it. So I went to go see the movie. I just got back from it.

I believe that it is entirely worthwhile to at least watch the pilot of Firefly, then to go see the movie. Being involved with the series turns the movie into a really enjoyable one.

I can see that, I was not a huge fan of Angel and it was not a series you could just easily jump into.  I think part of the reason Whedon's writing really appeals to me revolves around theater, as in live theater.  I am a huge fan and would much rather do that than see a movie.  Whedon's work has always had an edge of that for me.

Now, I think of all the Whedon work out there, the best so far has either been Hush or The Body from Buffy.

And now for something slightly different (I spotted this while browsing at work):

Whedon to write/direct upcoming WonderWoman movie (http://www.comingsoon.net/news/topnews.php?id=8802).

Oh look, something for Shockeye to be a fanboi and fawn over.

Serenity = Good

Serenity kicked my ass.  Great sci-fi movie... but I am a Whedon fanboi.  Went with a few friends and my brother who had never even seen a episode of firefly and even he thought it was the best sci fi movie he's seen in years. 

Just got done talking with my brother about it.  He said it was awesome.  He liked Buffy and Angel, never saw Firefly.

It was better then Star Wars. Wife took me as date-night.

Don't look at the soundtrack before you go. They titled some tracks rather - unimaginatively and it gives away some of the happenings.

Avoid spoiler threads before you see it.

Loved it, didn't have as much character driven stuff as the series was capable of, but it stood up well on its own.

A friend of mine, whose opinion I really respect and whom I would never have thought to be a fan of Firefly, apparently was a fan of Firefly and thought the movie was "very good" if you know the series, "good" if you don't.

Though you really have to know her to get how odd it is that she watched Firefly.  Suffice it to say, she's very discerning, so if she liked it I think that anyone with any appreciation for good story should like it too.

Serenity.... good.  Except for the parts where SPOILER DELETED and SPOILER DELETED.   :-(

I was not a Wheldon fan, I only knew him from Aliens 4 (yuk) and Buffy/Angel.

Buffy I've only even seen bits and pieces. Every episode I saw seemed to be based on Scooby Doo Where are You, perhaps that was just unlucky. Angel seemed vey angsty.

Firefly changed my opinion, and the movie is very well writtin. I hope he can do a triliogy/another series about it. The actors are good, and Mal roleplayed at Gencon in a GURPS Firefly game.

  I'd never seen Firefly before until I caught an episode the other day. Then I immediately went and got the whole series. What a show. I really hope someone picks this up.

Although the thread has been mostly about Serenity, I went and saw Mirrormask last night and really enjoyed it.  After a bit of a slow background setup, it really takes off.  If you liked the Sandman comics, I think you will like this also.

Since it is only playing in like a dozen theatres, you may have to wait for dvd.

I think Buffy and Angel are lame.  They make me cringe, what's the draw?  I thought it was for kids.

Good writing, character development, monsters.. that kind of thing.  Btw, we're not backfilling for WUA's position.  Well, I suppose we could, but I'd need at least two forms of ID and 3 valid references.

Make that two clamoring for this job  :-P

I don't see the appeal either....Or of Party of 5....Or of Dawson's Creek...Or whatever. Not for the 25 and over Male demographic at least. Good writing be damned.

I have seen a couple episodes of Firefly though, and I didn't think it was bad. Not on the level that I would think would garner a whole new brand of Sci-Fi fanboi's ("Whedon" fanbois, I mean), but not bad.

A lot of people liked the universe. A lot of people liked the writing and humor.

I thought the first was clever but the rest of both were absolutely boring. I don't like Whedon's literary mojo, it's just....bad. I probably would have like Firefly also - yet another interesting world with terrible writing. Oh well.

Buffy and Angel *were* bad...empty calories. But to each his own. I liked the first few eps of Buffy, but every character speaks with the same voice. I hate that. It's the same reason I don't really like Tarantino movies too much. I expect 5 different characters to speak and act like 5 different characters. Having the witty, irreverant character is fine, but they don't all need to be that way.

It seems to me that the writing on Buffy/Angel always fell into two categtories- the aforementioned wit and the mopey, melodramatic garbage. Oh why can't I be with Angel blah blah blah...

I would also say that pulling off comedy/serious is very hard to do in a long series. I'm I *really* supposed to take it seriously that Buffy's mom died, or that she can't be with Angel, when just last week 10 cheerleaders were killed by vampies what was basically a gag piece?

It's like "ok, here is a comedy part, cheerleader eaten by giant snake"...ok now here is a serious part look Buffy is all crying and such over her man problems!

You can mix humor and drama, but not like that. It can't be as simple as "ok when this guy dies it's all funny ha ha, but this guy over here you're supposed to be all shocked and saddened!" So for me the "emotional" parts are totally meaningless - some important character died wow I care. No not really.

When you play death for gags it's hard to get people like me to recognize the "serious" parts as actually serious.

Dead like Me did a lot of the same humor correctly.

Not much else I could say other than, "I disagree with what you said."  You think it didn't work going from black comedy to serious, well, I think it did.  :-o  Yes, Buffy's mom dying was said, no Biff the anonymous janitor getting impaled by a giant beetle demon wasn't.  One person died of cancer that you'd seen throughout the entire series and the other got 5 minutes of air time and a one liner before dying to a ficitonal creature.  Not hard to figure out and follow for fans of the show.   Btw, Buffy shark-jumped somewhere in season 4 where the writing just started getting bad and the plot lines got stagnant and slow. You'd still get the occasional gem, but by then the fans were just going through the motions.   You'll have to find anyone that really liked season 6 and 7 you're going to have to go to the real delusional die-hards.

Angel was all over the place.  It could be very very good and then just very very bad.  Everything with Connor in it is pretty much a wash.  His story line was probably the worst they ever came up with and they just stuck with it for so long.


My comment had multiple layers of meaning.. like an onion.  Or something. 

Anyhow, it's all personal taste and argueing over it really accomplished jack shit beyond "I like it" "It sucks!" "Well, that's just like your opinion.. man".  I mean really, people even dislike Seinfeld.  :-P

I think it's a low pain tolerance for campy humor. I couldn't handle the first season of Buffy - which I bought on DVD on release because it was just one of those things I'll own when it's on DVD. So I never bought anymore. The whole show made me hurt. Badly. And generally I can look past that when a show has enough hot girls vs. how many bad lines it has. But Whedon is notoriously slow at resolving plot issues and his inability to properly (and again, in due time) create good character backstory just leads to a show with a cast I don't care about and plot points I forget about. Other shows, X-Files and more recently Supernatural give you roughly 75% of a characters background in a matter of the first two or three episodes. The only show I can think of that was as slow as Buffy in that respect was Highlander (but I think it has a right given the world it's in). Whedon simply isn't for everyone. Unfortunately I don't quite know who it's for other than my original "pain-tolerance" assumption. Truly overrated tv. As for Firefly (the series), I watched the whole thing in two sittings, I kept waiting to learn something about the characters that was interesting. Unfortunately when it was all over I simply didn't give a shit. It's tough writing character dramas when all the characters are shallower than a kiddy pool after half a season.

Again, I'm just not seeing the shallow characters in either Buffy or Firefly. It's easy to paint that picture in your head when you're immediately dismissive of the material going in.  Give me a movie with Nic Cage and John Travolta in it and I'm going to come off thinking Cage was a crappy ham and Travolta was just a goddamned caricature, doesn't make it so. Hell, it might have been the second coming of Fight Club, but I probably wouldn't be able to get past Cage's damned facial twitching.

It probably comes down to camp and Whedon's style.  If you don't have a health liking for either, you're just not going to like his work.

I don't know what to tell you if you didn't like Adaptation.

Also, Travolta is a caricature. A walking joke of a real actor. Who? I don't know. Someone good.

I can't think of a single instance in Buffy when an "innocent" died and it was used as a joke.  Sure, evil people sometimes die in funny ways, but I can't remember any good/neutral people dying as a gag.

Regarding characters using the same voice... I disagree.  They have similar humor, that I can agree with, but I would wager I could tell most Buffy lines from most Willow lines from most Xander lines from just about any Anya line.

"A male enters a doctor's office with a duck sitting on his head.  The doctor.. Shh!  Quiet or you'll miss the humorous conclusion!  The doctor says, 'What seems to be the problem?' And the duck says, 'I have a man attached to my ass!'  See, it was the duck and not the man who spoke."

Wow, I don't like Buffy and now I'm auditioning for jackass-flavor of the month?  I guess dude.

I didn't know Buffy was known for its good writing, but I'll take your word for it.  I really didn't realize the show was so popular on this forum.  I guess it's like what a couple of you said, you have to be a fan of campy humor.  Then I'm sure it's good.  A masterpiece even.

Wow, are you serious?

How about the season 1 (?) finale where the mayor turns into a snake. A bunch of people get killed there and it isn't a big deal at all. In fact, I think it's very safe to say that 80% of the deaths in Buffy are gag deaths. As in, they are vaguely funny then immediately forgotten. I mean, think about what a FUCKED UP place this is. You think after one week anyone would even still live there? I think after the mayor turns into a giant snake and eats a bunch of people while vampires attack and kill cheerleaders I'm probably going to pack up my remaining kids and move to a safer place - like Iraq.

Maybe 'gag' was a bad term. How about meaningless, throwaway, immediately forgotten? They certainly aren't serious or to be taken seriously. ANother day, another 5 dead teens...ho hum!

I understand the idea that someone who has been a regular on the show for years is "more important" than some throwaway. But my point is that random person dies and NOBODY cares, it has zero impact on the story, and everyone seems to immediately forgot it happened. Hey Jenny and Marc got eaten by demons yesterday - bummer let's go to the mall!

The entire series says that human life is not valuable. So when major characters die I don't care. Kill them all - good riddance. Maybe that's what they get for telling jokes while countless people die.

Says who? The man? "People"? The word on the street? The writing was amusing but monotone.

They live on a "hell mouth".  It's a world where demons, magic, and the undead exist.  Seems pretty fucked up. 

Yes. I suggest a "moving van" for the unfortunate inhabitants.

Okay, that I can agree with.  But an innocent death was never, to my recollection, used as a punch line.

Both principals.

Really.  Look again.

The principal who was eaten by the mayorsnake wasn't exactly an innocent.  He was fully aware of the goings on in the hellmouth, knew Buffy was the slayer, and just fucked with her because he decided he hated her.  He did numerous evil things, including encouraging the cops to put Buffy in jail for murder when he knew she was innocent.

There was a principal before him, right?  Was he the one eaten by hyenapeople?  If so, okay, you've got a point there, but that was also the first season before they had really, in my opinion, figured out what they wanted to do with the show.  But that doesn't change it- you're right, there's one innocent whose death was a punchline.

The last principal in the series never died.  He came close a couple times, but he didn't die... so I'm going with the hazy memory about the first one and the hyenapeople.

Also, the thing about the mom dying being so different- it was because she died of purely natural causes.  It was very hard for the Scoobies to accept, given how many deaths they'd prevented, how many fights they'd won, that there was nothing they could've done.  All they'd done to protect near strangers from powerful, cosmic, demonic threats, but they couldn't do anything to prevent a blood clot to the brain.  This is reflected in the episode, when Xander starts trying to find an enemy on whom to place the blame, any number of spells, demons, then he starts trying to blame the doctors, and Willow brings him out of it.  But that's what made that one resonate.  That and there's a difference between finding out that someone you kinda knew died and coming home to find your mom dead on the couch without warning.

But I definitely won't say the series was without flaws.  Believability was a big one, continuity in certain aspects, and it definitely suffered from characters have sudden... changes of heart, without a huge amount of provocation.  I thought Spike's turn from evil to good was well done, but just about all the other "alignment shifts" were like a light switch.  Spike went from pure evil, to mostly evil, to evil but unable to do anything about it, to not-monstrous-evil-but-still-not-a-great-guy evil, to reluctant goodguy, to complete goodguy in the last episode.  (I account his being protective of Dawn to his obsession with Buffy, not genuine altruism.)

Yeah, so I used to watch a lot of Buffy?  What?

I disagree.  (In a purely happy disagreeing way).

Sure, he was a dick.  That doesn't make him not an innocent.

A truly horrible and disagreeable little man.  But that doesn't make him a bad buy.  I think the show went out of his way to demonstrate that.  He actually had the ego to think he WAS Buffy's 'Big Bad.'  Yet he was totally powerless and his death underscored that in a humourous way.

And, yeah, I was talking about Principle Flutie.  And I agree that it was because they hadn't found their feet.  Doesn't change my point.

:D

Ironwood is correct.  Snyder's death was a humorous point, but I think the underlying message was mean little people who kiss the assess of those larger in power end up getting eaten in the end.  Or something something.

Whedon is great, but like most people, will have those who like and those who dislike them.  And the more people that shine towards you, the greater the degree of like and dislike you will attract.

Schild and dusematic do not like Whedon.  I do not like most things from Japanese cinema.  I do like chinese movies though...

The only statement that I have read from this thread that makes no sense is that all the characters are the same, which only makes sense if you only saw fifteen seconds of one episode.

In my book, it's not that they're all the same, it's that they all have the same level of depth. On the Whedon scale it's a lot. On any other scale it's none. Whedon takes too damn long with character development. That may be why people think all the characters are the same.

Strangely, I never get tired of hearing that.

I just had an idea for a YTMND.

I actually agree with you.  Buffy had the greatest depth, and the quickest.  Willow and Giles were a close second with Xander being the least of the main characters.  Your right though, he does like to leave a lot of mystery and then slowly unravel it.  I enjoy how he unravels the tapestry though, I don't need all my kittens in one basket.

I was (and am) a huge 'Jossverse' fan. The first 3 seasons of Buffy are just fantastic for the most part (there are a couple of duds in there, for sure). Season 4 really started to fall off (although it had the classic 'Hush', from which a poster here (Clyde Jr.?) made an avatar), Season 5 was boring, Season 6 was unrelentingly depressing, and Season 7 was just annoying.

I really liked Angel as well. I didn't like some of the storylines/characters, but overall I enjoyed it. It was mostly darker than Buffy, with an almost noir-ish feel to it at times.

I love Nicholas Cage, but I couldn't stand Adaptation. I spent most of the movie going, okgreatwherearewegoingwiththis? 

Ironically I spend my time watching whedon saying "okgreatwhyarewegoingherewiththisooooohigetityou'lltellmein8episodes."

Oh I'm not sayin the man is God. I couldn't stand Buffy or Angel. But Firefly just hits me right. Dunno.

I fell asleep during Adaptation.  I'm not sure it's a knock against the movie though, I was really fucking tired.

I got the same feeling from House of Sand and Fog.  My critic said what the fuck was the point of that movie?

I dunno.  He takes "dick" to whole new levels.  He wanted to fucking ruin Buffy's life.  That's fairly evil.

But when it comes to a matter of degrees like this, it's all about personal opinion, so to each his own.

Me either. I thought just about all of the characters were either developed quite well in the show or when they weren't, it was because they had a story that the actor and writer knew, but he hadn't gotten to yet (like Book). I cared about the characters, every last one of them, even the ones like Jayne who you aren't supposed to like but just can't help liking.

Buffy I couldn't stand because I have a low tolerance for camp. But I never saw Firefly as campy or even attempting to be. The humor worked for me.

Shallow, no; cliched, perhaps.

Bear in mind that we have the Tart with the Heart, the rugged ex-soldier capt, the brainless muscle and the preacher with the dark past.  That's fairly cliched.

However, I didn't care and I'd be surprised if anyone else did.  You show me a character show without that kind of pigeonholing and I'll show you a show that won't work terribly well.  Games are patterns  TV likes to give us proscribed themes that we can instantly get our head around and then be suprised and exhilirated when we our expectations are shocked.  Jayne worked best for me when he was showing emotion :  Mostly the shame and regret in two episodes.  I thought his speech about the reavers with Kaylee was a perfect moment too.  Also, when Mal just kills people, it turns on the head the idea that this guy will do the right thing always.  You realise it's not about that.  My one regret is we never got to see Book flipping out and killing people.  Because you know that episode was coming, right ?

I think that's why everyone liked Wash really.  He was the hardest to pigeon hole.  Even River was more easily translated.

Or I could be wrong.