Does Joss Whedon know why his shows are good?

[Aidinthel]

I'm of the "Whedon? Fuck, I LOVE Firefly! Wait, he does other stuff?" crowd. I don't care how good the rest is, because Firefly is enough for me. Even Serenity, even though it obviously had to be written to plug the gaping hole in Firefly lore left by Fox's inevitable betrayal the show's cancellation and suffered for it.

Have you watched Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog? It's incredible. And it has Nathan Fillion in it!

 

[Enkidu88]

I may just be sacrificing major nerd cred here but . . .

His shows are good?

This was my thought exactly.

I can't even tell you why his shows are good. I can't think of one that is.

Or perhaps it's just that I still hold a grudge against him for ruining the Alien franchise.

Oh the Aliens franchise was dead long before Whedon got his hands on it (everyone seems to forget how bad Aliens 3 was). And if he's guilty of anything it's digging up the bloated corpse of Aliens and trying to pass it off as a movie.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Back to OT. What exactly is so good at Buffy? I'm really not into vampires and from what I've seen, it seems... I dunno, girly?

Speaking as someone who seen almost the entire series (still working on season 7) and is a guy, I think I can safely say that it is not as girly as it seems. Yes, there is a significant focus on relationships (and Buffy's near constant troubles with), but it tends to be evened out by the wholesale demon and vampire ass-kicking that occurs at least once an episode. Also, one season has a part-man, part-demon, part cyborg with an arm that transforms into a chaingun. How can you not love that?

OT: Anyway, loved Buffy, never watched Angel or Dollhouse, thought Firefly was overrated but good, quite liked Doctor Horrible (even with the downer ending), and thought Serenity was good. He seems to be consistently good, so I would wager he does know what people want from him.

 

[Solusumbra]

He has like two female character models.

Attractive and inexplicably strong with over the top cheesy kung fu effects. Or ditsy and useless.

The only difference between Buffy and River is that River is meant to be GRIMDARKSPACEEXPERIMENT.

I dont know what you're talking about. You've obviously never paid any attention to Kaylee, Zoe, or Inara, because those three don't fit into any of the categories you describe. They have loads of character depth, even if we didn't get to see much of it due to the series cancellation. Buffy produced several strong and complex female characters, and Dollhouse had its own deal going which made its characters far more than stereotypes.

Please know what you are talking about before you make a statement like that.

 

[Snake Plissken]

I may just be sacrificing major nerd cred here but . . .

His shows are good?

This was my thought exactly.

I can't even tell you why his shows are good. I can't think of one that is.

Or perhaps it's just that I still hold a grudge against him for ruining the Alien franchise.

Oh the Aliens franchise was dead long before Whedon got his hands on it (everyone seems to forget how bad Aliens 3 was). And if he's guilty of anything it's digging up the bloated corpse of Aliens and trying to pass it off as a movie.

I think that people are generally pretty divided about the quality of Alien 3. But Joss Whedon just decided to piss all over any notions of good characters, dialogue, setting, and plot with Resurrection. At least there were SOME memorable characters and scenes in Alien 3, but I can't think of ANYTHING redeeming in the fourth film.

 

[Something Amyss]

Angle: mostly crap but popular because of its association with Buffy

Angle is popular because he won Olympic Gold with a broken FREAKIN' neck.

 

[Souplex]

No mention of his awful show "Dollhouse"?
I'm very worried about his heading the Avengers movie.

 

[WolfThomas]

He has like two female character models.

Attractive and inexplicably strong with over the top cheesy kung fu effects. Or ditsy and useless.

Better than just the later over again and over again, no?

I don't know I was thinking of Firefly when I wrote that, I thought the female characters were as well developed as the men.

but I can't think of ANYTHING redeeming in the fourth film.

Ron Perlman?

 

[Solusumbra]

Hyperbole, learn it, practice it, come back to me.

The point I was making, my pedantic little friend, was that he uses a lot of the same character types. You can look at pretty much any of his shows and pick out characters that fit the same, supposedly unique, niche. And that doesn't just apply to women.

90% of my behavior is the product of hyperbole (including that statement). And whether or not you thought you were exaggerating does not change the fact that you are wrong. Just because there are other films and shows whose characters are supposedly more complex and believable does not make his any less so.

 

[Shadowkire]

I think that people are generally pretty divided about the quality of Alien 3. But Joss Whedon just decided to piss all over any notions of good characters, dialogue, setting, and plot with Resurrection. At least there were SOME memorable characters and scenes in Alien 3, but I can't think of ANYTHING redeeming in the fourth film.

I am not a Whedon fan, but Aliens: Resurrection was not Whedon's fault. The screenplay he wrote was completely different from the hunk of crap that came out.

 

[Shadowkire]

some things

So wait, I only thought I was exaggerating? Sense, you make it in Russia.

And what I said wasn't wrong, as this is a true statement.

more things

Stop getting butt hurt because someone doesn't "zomg j'adore" your favourite nerd icon.

Instead of the two of you crafting arguments with no substance, how about Abandon4093 give us an example or two of those female characters he says were written better. This would give us perspective on what the two of you consider "well written."

 

[Snake Plissken]

I think that people are generally pretty divided about the quality of Alien 3. But Joss Whedon just decided to piss all over any notions of good characters, dialogue, setting, and plot with Resurrection. At least there were SOME memorable characters and scenes in Alien 3, but I can't think of ANYTHING redeeming in the fourth film.

I am not a Whedon fan, but Aliens: Resurrection was not Whedon's fault. The screenplay he wrote was completely different from the hunk of crap that came out.

I don't know where people get this idea. I've heard this argument a million times before, and it is completely untrue. He's on record saying that they changed the ending...and that's it. For the final version, he said that the third act was the only thing changed. If you're somehow defending the writing in the first two acts of the film, you've apparently never seen it.

 

[Mimssy]

I don't think he knows why they're good, he just does what he likes and for the most part it's a succcess.

Things Joss does that are in his favour:
-Dialogue
-Juggles characters
-Writes women well

He has like two female character models.

Attractive and inexplicably strong with over the top cheesy kung fu effects. Or ditsy and useless.

The only difference between Buffy and River is that River is meant to be GRIMDARKSPACEEXPERIMENT.

You are forgetting characters like Willow, Tara, Joyce, Cordelia (who becomes a real person in Angel), Sierra, Whiskey, and Adelle. All of these characters had depth to them.