That said, I kind of wish there were more long-term romances on TV. I think the problem is that either relationships are angsty beyond all belief because of the car-wreck quality, or because of some sort of fate intervening when the people are "meant to be" (B/A, Syd/Vaughn). And if they aren't angsty beyond all belief, they're beautiful and happy and perfect (the feeling I get from Riley/Buffy). So then the producers decide angsty is better.
I wonder sometimes if network execs and tv producers fall into the same traps as romance novelists and romance novel publishers - they just can't figure out how to show a real relationship with all its ups and downs effectively. Those of us who have had relationships know there has to be more going on their chemistry for it to work. The two people need a commonality of interest - they need to be able to actually have a conversation that lasts more than 20 minutes. And they have to be able to accept each other at their worste and their best. B/A - really doesn't work b/c the two characters never have a conversation that isn't sappy or confrontational - we don't see them as friends. Buffy even says as much in Lover's Walk. It didn't have to be that way - it's how the writers chose to write it. Same with B/R - which we never really see developed as anything other than a romantic - heavy on the sex- relationship - which writes Riley into a corner. Compare this to Firefly which doesn't show the sex between Zoe and Wash, but does show these two interacting. (Actually B/S in S3-S5, beginning of S6, and S7 got that across as well - when they weren't into kissing or sex - was when we got a far more interesting interaction, in fact you see a more evolved relationship develop sans the sex or making out onscreen.) Whedon in his commentary to the Pilot of Firefly, mentions how he deliberately refrained from showing a closeup of Zoe/Wash's sex scenes, he was interested in showing that in another way. I think this is a trend in Whedon's work actually - he sees onscreen sex as being impersonal - possibly exploitive, so has characters pay for it or only shows it when it is meant to be impersonal or exploitive - ie the B/S sex in S6, the W/L in S4 ATS, the Inanara sex with her clients. Yet when you get a true connection between characters - such as the B/A scene in Innocence or the B/S scenes in Chosen that are subletly referred to - we don't see much skin. The writer may be stating that when I show you the act - it should disturb you because you are a "voyeur" and peeking in on something intimate. When I don't - that's the far more meaningful act - b/c you don't see it. Interesting film technigue that goes back to the 1940s, 50s thrillers and westerns - you knew the leads were romantically involved, but kisses/sex were alluded to not shown, unless the characters were meant to be seen in a derogatory way.
Sort of a long-winded way of agreeing with you on Firefly. In rewatching the pilot - I realized how much potential the show had and really miss it. Interesting tid-bit, by the way, the network objected to Zoe and Wash being married. They wanted everyone single - believing that generated more conflict. Whedon fought them on it and sort of won.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Re: LOL!
Date: 2004-01-08 01:59 pm (UTC)I wonder sometimes if network execs and tv producers fall into the same traps as romance novelists and romance novel publishers - they just can't figure out how to show a real relationship with all its ups and downs effectively. Those of us who have had relationships know there has to be more going on their chemistry for it to work. The two people need a commonality of interest - they need to be able to actually have a conversation that lasts more than 20 minutes. And they have to be able to accept each other at their worste and their best. B/A - really doesn't work b/c the two characters never have a conversation that isn't sappy or confrontational - we don't see them as friends. Buffy even says as much in Lover's Walk. It didn't have to be that way - it's how the writers chose to write it. Same with B/R - which we never really see developed as anything other than a romantic - heavy on the sex- relationship - which writes Riley into a corner. Compare this to Firefly which doesn't show the sex between Zoe and Wash, but does show these two interacting. (Actually B/S in S3-S5, beginning of S6, and S7 got that across as well - when they weren't into kissing or sex - was when we got a far more interesting interaction, in fact you see a more evolved relationship develop sans the sex or making out onscreen.) Whedon in his commentary to the Pilot of Firefly, mentions how he deliberately refrained from showing a closeup of Zoe/Wash's sex scenes, he was interested in showing that in another way. I think this is a trend in Whedon's work actually - he sees onscreen sex as being impersonal - possibly exploitive, so has characters pay for it or only shows it when it is meant to be impersonal or exploitive - ie the B/S sex in S6, the W/L in S4 ATS, the Inanara sex with her clients. Yet when you get a true connection between characters - such as the B/A scene in Innocence or the B/S scenes in Chosen that are subletly referred to - we don't see much skin. The writer may be stating that when I show you the act - it should disturb you because you are a "voyeur" and peeking in on something intimate. When I don't - that's the far more meaningful act - b/c you don't see it. Interesting film technigue that goes back to the 1940s, 50s thrillers and westerns - you knew the leads were romantically involved, but kisses/sex were alluded to not shown, unless the characters were meant to be seen in a derogatory way.
Sort of a long-winded way of agreeing with you on Firefly.
In rewatching the pilot - I realized how much potential the show had and really miss it. Interesting tid-bit, by the way, the network objected to Zoe and Wash being married. They wanted everyone single - believing that generated more conflict. Whedon fought them on it and sort of won.