![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Thoughts...
1. Well Amazon is in talks to pick up the Expanse, I'm admittedly ambivalent, I'd rather they picked up Lucifer to be honest. Considering I can't seem to get back into it, and have 13 episodes and counting on the DVR. It didn't hold my attention that closely during S1, and I read the first of the books -- not that book did either. (I found Holden rather annoying, and my favorite characters died at the end of book 1 - Leviathan Wakes.) Yeah, yeah, I know it has diverse casting, but a lot of series I watch have diversified casting. I just find it hard to follow and rather badly paced.
I haven't given up on the Expanse exactly, I'm just...rather meh about it. There's other series that have been cancelled that I'd rather they save such as Sense8 or Lucifer.
But alas, no one cares what I think. And I tend to like weird things that sort of go against the mainline.
Fox is doing pretty much what I thought they were going to do in regards to the two Lucifer bonus episodes or extra episodes that they'd filmed -- Air Them Next Week -- they are burning them off. They do that now when a show gets cancelled. Burn the excess off during the summer months, when they've nothing else to air. Also add them to the DVDs.
Lucifer, Timeless, and The Expanse are sort in limbo at the moment and hunting homes. No news yet on whether NBC will continue with Timeless - they were waiting until the finale aired. (I think it has.) Probably checking to see if there is a time slot. The Expanse has the best chance because Amazon is hunting sci-fi serials with built in fanbases. Lucifer is the biggest long-shot. (Damn it. As luck would have it, Lucifer is the only I've really been following. I gave up on Timeless (it irritated and bored me), The Expanse (on the fence, right now it's just boring me and I haven't watched an episode since well the first half of season two ended), Lucifer on the other hand -- I've watched fairly quickly after it aired and posted about. It's the only that had characters that grabbed me, the other two? Meh. So guess which one has the least chance of surviving? Lucifer.
Such is life.
I'm weirdly amused and irritated by this. But then I have a dark sense of humor. Irony amuses me.
2. Quick?
a. Rolling Stones or The Beatles?
b. Heart or Queen?
c. Nirvana or Coldplay?
d. Prince or Michael Jackson?
e. The Who or Pink Floyd?
f. The Eagles or ABBA
g. Lady Gaga or Maddona?
H. Fleetwood Mack or Wings?
i. Leonard Cohen or Paul Simon?
j. David Bowie or Bob Dylan?
3. Ran across an odd and somewhat disturbing post on Tumblr which reminded me how women have been manipulated by the media over time to see rape as crime perpetuated equally by men and women, and often caused by women. I saw this a lot in the 1970s-90s. Less so now.
The post makes the argument that one of the female Buffy writers is the "rapist" behind the Seeing Red episode, and the real-life rapist in which the crime is based. Which is an interesting, if somewhat warped, interpretation of the facts. For one thing, the episode wasn't written by a woman, it was written by Stephen DeKnight, and edited by Joss Whedon, who basically ghost wrote most of the episodes. I know this because I listened to the interviews with the writers immediately after it aired. The three writers involved in that episode were DeNight, Espenson, and Fury. The idea was rather loosely based on a pitch that Marti made regarding an incident during her college years. She'd been in a kinky sexual relationship, and when her boyfriend called it off, she tried to resurrect it and he kicked her out. We don't know the details. And she pitched it for Buffy to do with Spike -- possibly around the episode Gone. I remember because the boards exploded over it and we discussed it to death. Also, unlike now, we had access to information that was provided by the writers. A lot of that information is long since gone.
The writer goes on to give Whedon a clean slate and says based on Cabin in The Woods, he clearly is a feminist and has been given a raw deal. (I don't know I remember Cabin in the Woods, that can be interpreted more than one way, also Whedon didn't really write and direct it -- it was mainly Drew Goddard's baby, he helped Goddard.) I disagree -- I think it's more complicated than that. Also, I've seen almost everything the director and writer has done, read his interviews, and listened to the commentary. As I was telling a friend while waiting for Infinity War to start, Whedon was influenced by two movie tropes -- Westerns and Slasher Movies. He even studied violence in the Western. And in many ways his writing is a direct commentary and meta on the sexual violence in both Westerns and Slasher films. As is the television show Westworld, although I think "Westworld" is doing a better job with the Western trope. Dollhouse basically was examining the same themes "Westworld" was, just in a more clumsy and exploitative fashion. Whedon is a clumsy writer, and a tad lazy. He doesn't dot his i's or cross his t's, in part because he had it too easy, got famous too fast, and had a sitcom upbringing. Not that "Westworld" is perfect, but it is neater and cleaner thematically.
Whedon...has issues with women and gender. Not unlike most of the men of his generation.
You can see it in his relations with his wife and the women in his personal life. In his writing, both comics and film. I honestly think he was trying to explore those issues and power dynamics in a meaningful way, but due to various factors, not the least among them being the collaborative nature of the medium, his message got a little muddled at times and can be interpreted in a derogatory manner.
A survivor of child abuse and rape, stated something interesting on FB...that we had to find a way to re-intergrate the abusers into society, to find a way to rehabilitate them as well and not just banish them to the outskirts or demonize them. She cited the article entitled This is not Just about Junot Diaz -- the writer accused of sexual harassment and violence, who he, himself, had suffered from as a child. I think, Whedon, in his art was attempting to explore that from various angles -- how outside factors create an environment in which sexual violence exists, and slaying the perpetuators of the violence doesn't change or necessarily stop the violence -- they keep coming. That there has to be another way. He didn't have any answers, but as a subversive artist he felt the need to explore the possibilities.
And in doing so, took some huge risks. His film "Much Ado About Nothing" critiques how men denigrate women and themselves in the process. Buffy the Vampire Slayer equally critiques how our society views gender and sexual interactions in genre and outside genre settings -- providing a sort of meta-narrative commentary on it. Like all good art -- it provokes conversation, and provokes a reaction. You don't forget it after you see it and muddle on. Instead you analyze it to death, and study it in school, write papers and posts on it, and rearrange it in your head -- constantly asking yourself, is this how it has to be? I don't accept this. I want something better. How can I achieve it? And what have I learned from it?
Anyhow...just a few thoughts to throw out there.
I haven't given up on the Expanse exactly, I'm just...rather meh about it. There's other series that have been cancelled that I'd rather they save such as Sense8 or Lucifer.
But alas, no one cares what I think. And I tend to like weird things that sort of go against the mainline.
Fox is doing pretty much what I thought they were going to do in regards to the two Lucifer bonus episodes or extra episodes that they'd filmed -- Air Them Next Week -- they are burning them off. They do that now when a show gets cancelled. Burn the excess off during the summer months, when they've nothing else to air. Also add them to the DVDs.
Lucifer, Timeless, and The Expanse are sort in limbo at the moment and hunting homes. No news yet on whether NBC will continue with Timeless - they were waiting until the finale aired. (I think it has.) Probably checking to see if there is a time slot. The Expanse has the best chance because Amazon is hunting sci-fi serials with built in fanbases. Lucifer is the biggest long-shot. (Damn it. As luck would have it, Lucifer is the only I've really been following. I gave up on Timeless (it irritated and bored me), The Expanse (on the fence, right now it's just boring me and I haven't watched an episode since well the first half of season two ended), Lucifer on the other hand -- I've watched fairly quickly after it aired and posted about. It's the only that had characters that grabbed me, the other two? Meh. So guess which one has the least chance of surviving? Lucifer.
Such is life.
I'm weirdly amused and irritated by this. But then I have a dark sense of humor. Irony amuses me.
2. Quick?
a. Rolling Stones or The Beatles?
b. Heart or Queen?
c. Nirvana or Coldplay?
d. Prince or Michael Jackson?
e. The Who or Pink Floyd?
f. The Eagles or ABBA
g. Lady Gaga or Maddona?
H. Fleetwood Mack or Wings?
i. Leonard Cohen or Paul Simon?
j. David Bowie or Bob Dylan?
3. Ran across an odd and somewhat disturbing post on Tumblr which reminded me how women have been manipulated by the media over time to see rape as crime perpetuated equally by men and women, and often caused by women. I saw this a lot in the 1970s-90s. Less so now.
The post makes the argument that one of the female Buffy writers is the "rapist" behind the Seeing Red episode, and the real-life rapist in which the crime is based. Which is an interesting, if somewhat warped, interpretation of the facts. For one thing, the episode wasn't written by a woman, it was written by Stephen DeKnight, and edited by Joss Whedon, who basically ghost wrote most of the episodes. I know this because I listened to the interviews with the writers immediately after it aired. The three writers involved in that episode were DeNight, Espenson, and Fury. The idea was rather loosely based on a pitch that Marti made regarding an incident during her college years. She'd been in a kinky sexual relationship, and when her boyfriend called it off, she tried to resurrect it and he kicked her out. We don't know the details. And she pitched it for Buffy to do with Spike -- possibly around the episode Gone. I remember because the boards exploded over it and we discussed it to death. Also, unlike now, we had access to information that was provided by the writers. A lot of that information is long since gone.
The writer goes on to give Whedon a clean slate and says based on Cabin in The Woods, he clearly is a feminist and has been given a raw deal. (I don't know I remember Cabin in the Woods, that can be interpreted more than one way, also Whedon didn't really write and direct it -- it was mainly Drew Goddard's baby, he helped Goddard.) I disagree -- I think it's more complicated than that. Also, I've seen almost everything the director and writer has done, read his interviews, and listened to the commentary. As I was telling a friend while waiting for Infinity War to start, Whedon was influenced by two movie tropes -- Westerns and Slasher Movies. He even studied violence in the Western. And in many ways his writing is a direct commentary and meta on the sexual violence in both Westerns and Slasher films. As is the television show Westworld, although I think "Westworld" is doing a better job with the Western trope. Dollhouse basically was examining the same themes "Westworld" was, just in a more clumsy and exploitative fashion. Whedon is a clumsy writer, and a tad lazy. He doesn't dot his i's or cross his t's, in part because he had it too easy, got famous too fast, and had a sitcom upbringing. Not that "Westworld" is perfect, but it is neater and cleaner thematically.
Whedon...has issues with women and gender. Not unlike most of the men of his generation.
You can see it in his relations with his wife and the women in his personal life. In his writing, both comics and film. I honestly think he was trying to explore those issues and power dynamics in a meaningful way, but due to various factors, not the least among them being the collaborative nature of the medium, his message got a little muddled at times and can be interpreted in a derogatory manner.
A survivor of child abuse and rape, stated something interesting on FB...that we had to find a way to re-intergrate the abusers into society, to find a way to rehabilitate them as well and not just banish them to the outskirts or demonize them. She cited the article entitled This is not Just about Junot Diaz -- the writer accused of sexual harassment and violence, who he, himself, had suffered from as a child. I think, Whedon, in his art was attempting to explore that from various angles -- how outside factors create an environment in which sexual violence exists, and slaying the perpetuators of the violence doesn't change or necessarily stop the violence -- they keep coming. That there has to be another way. He didn't have any answers, but as a subversive artist he felt the need to explore the possibilities.
And in doing so, took some huge risks. His film "Much Ado About Nothing" critiques how men denigrate women and themselves in the process. Buffy the Vampire Slayer equally critiques how our society views gender and sexual interactions in genre and outside genre settings -- providing a sort of meta-narrative commentary on it. Like all good art -- it provokes conversation, and provokes a reaction. You don't forget it after you see it and muddle on. Instead you analyze it to death, and study it in school, write papers and posts on it, and rearrange it in your head -- constantly asking yourself, is this how it has to be? I don't accept this. I want something better. How can I achieve it? And what have I learned from it?
Anyhow...just a few thoughts to throw out there.
no subject
Timeless irritates me, too, but I still love my silly time travel series. It's a real long shot but I want it to get a third season.
a.
Rolling Stones orThe Beatlesb.
Heart orQueenc. Nirvana
or Coldplay?d.
Prince orMichael Jacksone. The Who
or Pink Floyd?f.
The Eagles or ABBASteely Dang.
Lady Gaga or Maddona?You mean Madonna, I assume, but no thank you. I pick Aretha Franklin.H. Fleetwood Mac
or Wings?i.
Leonard Cohen or Paul Simon?Joni Mitchellj.
David Bowie orBob Dylanno subject
Eh, it really was between the two musical choices I put down. I like Aretha Franklin too, but she has zip in common with either Madonna or Lady Gaga, not even remotely comparable.
And I'd originally had Joni or Joan Baez.
It's not neither, I'll pick my own sort of questionnaire. ;-)
no subject
You're right but that was kind of the point. ♥
no subject
Orange or Apple
Steak or Chicken
That sort of thing.
Not, oh, I don't like Steak or Chicken -- so Pork.
Sorry Pork wasn't even on the menu. Aretha wasn't on the menu.
no subject
Disagree. Both are folk musicians, both sung and performed with Dylan and various artists in various folk festivals. They also perform some of the same songs.
Are you just trying to be contrary? Because warning? I'm in a really bad mood -- have had a horrid day. And was just doing this for fun, not to be serious or anything. ;-)
no subject
I am absolutely not trying to make your bad day worse.
I'm sorry.
no subject
I just wanted to discuss not fight about music. But no one else does. Such is social media. My uncle just posted on FB that he didn't understand why we had to pick between the Beatles and the Stones, it's not like there aren't any other bands at that time. And I'm thinking, REALLY? REALLY? While another woman posted that she use to fight about this in the 8th grade.