Joss Whedon/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
(clean up)
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1:
{{workcreator}}
* Joss Whedon is very good at leaving small snippets that give you a ton of information and make you want to find out more, like the Reavers in [[Firefly]], or The Attic in [[Dollhouse]], but every single time he tries to explain them they become a lot less interesting. The Reavers were fascinating as people who went mad for an unknown reason, who caused other people to go mad. They weren't, when they were the failed result of a scientific experiment. The Attic was terrifying when it was being unable to think. It loses quite a bit when it's "happy thought then bad thought, lather rinse repeat, oh yeah and Arcane".
** I actually found the Reavers ''more'' interesting once their origins were revealed. Moral ambiguity fascinates me, and the Reavers' backstory opens up all kinds of questions about good and evil and the price of peace.
Line 11:
*** You assume that Whedon had major networks just throwing themselves at him, offering to pick up whatever show he feels like pitching. Even Buffy, his most popular show, never pulled the kind of numbers that a show like House does. Despite the Fan Myopia that tends to surround him, Joss Whedon has nowhere near the clout to be turning down a deal with Fox, which may well be the only network that would have been willing to greenlight Dollhouse in the first place.
*** But hey, he's written Avengers. If that does well enough maybe that will change.
*** Although it's also worth keeping in mind that there's [[Marvel Cinematic Universe|a few other reasons]] beside Joss Whedon's involvement why ''[[The Avengers (Filmfilm)|The Avengers]]'' is likely to be successful; let's be honest, given the hype surrounding it they could have gotten practically anyone but Uwe Boll to helm it and it would have been a box-office smash (and even Boll would probably managed to get some numbers with it), so it's not like it's entirely down to him. It's success certainly won't hurt his career or his clout by any means, though.
* Did a happy ending murder Joss Whedon's parents in Crime Alley or something? Would it kill him to just once avert the trope that his writing has become and have a relationship, or a show, end pleasantly? It stops being a shocking plot twist if everybody knows you can't write anything else, Joss.
** Serenity and Buffy both ended pretty well, and Angel really couldn't have ended any other way. It's mostly just the relationships that suffer and end horribly.
Line 32:
*** The downside of this comes when you've ''seen'' all of his usual/favorite tricks and tropes, and would like to see him do something new, or break from his established routine. And you slowly realize, that's all he's ''got''.
**** That's a criticism that applies to a ''lot'' of good but prolific writers though.
*** Also, the problem with [[Buffy -Speak]] being just the way he talks means that many of the characters he writes end up sounding the same.
 
{{reflist}}
[[Category:CreatorsCreator/Headscratchers]]
[[Category:Joss Whedon]]
[[Category:Headscratchers]]