![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkat1. Everything We Learned at the Star Wars Celebration 2025
Takeaways?
I really want to see Andor S2.
"The second set of episodes chronicles the four years of Cassian Andor’s (Diego Luna) life prior to Rogue One. In fact, Luna told the audience to watch the film again after the final episode of the series because “you are going to be seeing a different film.”
“Each three episodes will be one year,” showrunner Tony Gilroy explained. Additionally, each trio of episodes will be released together week-to-week. “We’re essentially dropping a new movie every week,” he added. “And we’re focusing on the most important three or four days of every year.”
and..
"Tony doesn’t hold back,” executive producer Sanne Wohlenberg said, summing up the experience of making 24 episodes. “And our team really outdid themselves. They put their hearts and souls into creating new worlds to tell this story. 140 sets across 20 stages, two backlots, 156 creatures, 30 droids.” And that was just the accounting we could hear as the crowd began to applaud the effort to bring it to the screen. Their enthusiasm was rewarded with a screening of the first season 2 episode."
Also, apparently the new Star Wars movie starring Ryan Gosling, and directed by Shawn Levy, entitled Star Wars: Star Fighter - takes place post Rise of Skywalker, and with all new characters. (Smart move. The better films pull away from the Skywalker story arcs.)
Also, I may try Ashoska again.
2. Not a fandom bit - but R.I.P Pope Francis. I'm saddened by this news.
Also he accomplished a lot in short period of time - shifting the course of the Catholic Church, promoting kindness and humility. (I also hope he talked some sense into devout Catholic and wannabee Fascist, Vance, who saw Francis before he died.)
3. Buffy Redux
So, I've been rewatching Buffy episodes intermittently. Picked up on a few things that I hadn't previously picked up on? I can tell which episodes were written by Whedon (specifically in S1 and 2, prior to the better writers coming on board). The dialogue is abysmal in a lot of the non-Whedon non-Greenwalt written episodes. Except for Dru and Spike for the most part, their dialogue is usually pretty good, so whoever wrote that portion of the script - or it was how the actors delivered it. But a lot of the dialogue is cringe in S2. Episodes like Reptile Boy (I skipped Inca Mummy Girl), and Halloween have cringe inducing dialogue, as does part of What's My Line (Kendra doesn't date well at all, actually she didn't work in 1997 either). And Cordelia/Xander don't have chemistry - I found their relationship toxic and cringe in retrospect (they are only really together because Xander is crushing hard on Buffy still and Cordy wants Angel. Xander - is, I'm sorry, a class A jerk. An episode doesn't go by in which I don't root for Cordelia to smack him.) Most of OZ and Willow's dialogue makes no sense, but is meet cute.
What works - is the Buffy/Angel, Spike/Dru relationships - and how well they parallel each other. Both are deeply flawed, uneven, toxic relationships in the power department. Also, it's clear that Buffy doesn't know Angel as well as she thinks she does, and Spike doesn't know Dru quite as well as he thinks. Or Dru's relationship with Angel, which is love/hate.
The theme of the season seems to be partly - you can't trust what you see, or do you really know a person, or everything isn't what it seems. Each episode highlights, how the leads are fooled by "appearances". Which of course leads up to the big reveal - that the dark presence that is coming isn't Dru, but Angelus, the demon lurking underneath Angel's skin. Who is so powerful - he was able to exorcise the demon hunting Giles. And is the reason Angel is cursed with a soul - to keep it in check.
It's important in this season that the monsters are pretty - hot even. Because it's harder to see that they are Monsters. In S1, the Monsters were more or less visible or obvious. This season, they are hidden. Lurking underneath the skin. It's why S2 more interesting that S1, and among the better seasons of the series. Also it takes a huge risk in making the male hearthrobe/love interest - the villain. That switch is a stroke of genius, and the reason the show became popular in its second season. It wasn't really done prior to Buffy. It's done a lot now, but it wasn't done that often back in the 20th Century.
That said, there's a lot sexist dialogue in there. When Whedon writes the episodes - it's not as prevalent, and often more of a commentary or a joke. But when others write them - such as Carl Ellsworth's cringe-inducing Halloween (great concept, poor execution) it's hard to over look. Everything about this episode is sexist, but I think the writer intended on commenting on it? It works and doesn't work. Best thing about it was Giles and Ethan Raine. But everything else, Cordy's skin tight cat costume, Willow's skin tight costume, and Buffy's low cut Southern Bell get up inclusive of the accent were cringe. Plus we have Xander in the hero role, along with Giles, who typically aren't. It didn't work. And I can see why Ellsworth didn't stick around as a writer.
What's My Line - has similar issues. They push against it for the most part, but then we have Kendra. Sigh. Where to start? The accent? She's from Africa, and arrives in the cargo hold (obviously meant to be a mislead). The insanely tight and sexy outfit? She has no clothing with her? And is treated like an object? I get the writers were trying to make a point, but I think it was a bit too on the nose, and cringe to boot.
Also, both Cordelia and the lady next door fall for the creepy guy with the free cosmetics samples. Just no. Can we be any more sexist? Cordy throughout the episode is depicted in a sexist and demeaning manner - except for her one-liners against Xander, which made me like her despite myself. Actually the surprising thing about this rewatch? Is how much I appreciate and like Cordelia. Charisma does an excellent job of making the character likable and relatable, despite Whedon's efforts to do the opposite. Upon re-watch, Cordelia is more likable than Xander, and he fully deserves every put down she sends his way. It's very hard to feel sorry for Xander. And Brendan plays him with a bit too much edgy entitlement. (Xander does not age well.) I recently discovered that Ryan Reynolds had originally been tapped to play the role (from Two Guys, a Girl and a Pizza Place) but wisely turned it down. Ever since, I've wondered if he may have provided more vulnerability to it? I still think the role was better suited to a someone who looks nerdy - like the guy who played Jonathan? Brendan, at 6'2, 25 years of age, dark headed, and muscular, is far too sexy and pretty to play nerdy guy. He also doesn't look like a high school kid, but then none of them did. The costume and wardrobe department go out of their way to make Xander and Willow look nerdy and geeky.
Will state that Buffy gets a better wardrobe and hair style in season 2. Either they got more money, or a better wardrobe department.
4. Daredevil Born Again
I liked the season finale, and for the most part the series. It's similar yet different than Netflix's Daredevil, which had defter writing. However both are fairly uneven.
Fisk is clearly Marvel's commentary on the Fascist asshole in the White House or the Hitler Wannabee. Fisk even kind of looks like him, without hair. And that makes watching this - an odd experience.
The message at the end is Daredevil can't take on Fisk alone, which sets up S2 to be more of a group effort. People are speculating already on who will be joining the cast. Already slotted are Karen and Frank Castle (Jon Bernthal) aka The Punisher. Also Lily Taylor, and Mathew Lillard in a recurring role.
Takeaways?
I really want to see Andor S2.
"The second set of episodes chronicles the four years of Cassian Andor’s (Diego Luna) life prior to Rogue One. In fact, Luna told the audience to watch the film again after the final episode of the series because “you are going to be seeing a different film.”
“Each three episodes will be one year,” showrunner Tony Gilroy explained. Additionally, each trio of episodes will be released together week-to-week. “We’re essentially dropping a new movie every week,” he added. “And we’re focusing on the most important three or four days of every year.”
and..
"Tony doesn’t hold back,” executive producer Sanne Wohlenberg said, summing up the experience of making 24 episodes. “And our team really outdid themselves. They put their hearts and souls into creating new worlds to tell this story. 140 sets across 20 stages, two backlots, 156 creatures, 30 droids.” And that was just the accounting we could hear as the crowd began to applaud the effort to bring it to the screen. Their enthusiasm was rewarded with a screening of the first season 2 episode."
Also, apparently the new Star Wars movie starring Ryan Gosling, and directed by Shawn Levy, entitled Star Wars: Star Fighter - takes place post Rise of Skywalker, and with all new characters. (Smart move. The better films pull away from the Skywalker story arcs.)
Also, I may try Ashoska again.
2. Not a fandom bit - but R.I.P Pope Francis. I'm saddened by this news.
Also he accomplished a lot in short period of time - shifting the course of the Catholic Church, promoting kindness and humility. (I also hope he talked some sense into devout Catholic and wannabee Fascist, Vance, who saw Francis before he died.)
3. Buffy Redux
So, I've been rewatching Buffy episodes intermittently. Picked up on a few things that I hadn't previously picked up on? I can tell which episodes were written by Whedon (specifically in S1 and 2, prior to the better writers coming on board). The dialogue is abysmal in a lot of the non-Whedon non-Greenwalt written episodes. Except for Dru and Spike for the most part, their dialogue is usually pretty good, so whoever wrote that portion of the script - or it was how the actors delivered it. But a lot of the dialogue is cringe in S2. Episodes like Reptile Boy (I skipped Inca Mummy Girl), and Halloween have cringe inducing dialogue, as does part of What's My Line (Kendra doesn't date well at all, actually she didn't work in 1997 either). And Cordelia/Xander don't have chemistry - I found their relationship toxic and cringe in retrospect (they are only really together because Xander is crushing hard on Buffy still and Cordy wants Angel. Xander - is, I'm sorry, a class A jerk. An episode doesn't go by in which I don't root for Cordelia to smack him.) Most of OZ and Willow's dialogue makes no sense, but is meet cute.
What works - is the Buffy/Angel, Spike/Dru relationships - and how well they parallel each other. Both are deeply flawed, uneven, toxic relationships in the power department. Also, it's clear that Buffy doesn't know Angel as well as she thinks she does, and Spike doesn't know Dru quite as well as he thinks. Or Dru's relationship with Angel, which is love/hate.
The theme of the season seems to be partly - you can't trust what you see, or do you really know a person, or everything isn't what it seems. Each episode highlights, how the leads are fooled by "appearances". Which of course leads up to the big reveal - that the dark presence that is coming isn't Dru, but Angelus, the demon lurking underneath Angel's skin. Who is so powerful - he was able to exorcise the demon hunting Giles. And is the reason Angel is cursed with a soul - to keep it in check.
It's important in this season that the monsters are pretty - hot even. Because it's harder to see that they are Monsters. In S1, the Monsters were more or less visible or obvious. This season, they are hidden. Lurking underneath the skin. It's why S2 more interesting that S1, and among the better seasons of the series. Also it takes a huge risk in making the male hearthrobe/love interest - the villain. That switch is a stroke of genius, and the reason the show became popular in its second season. It wasn't really done prior to Buffy. It's done a lot now, but it wasn't done that often back in the 20th Century.
That said, there's a lot sexist dialogue in there. When Whedon writes the episodes - it's not as prevalent, and often more of a commentary or a joke. But when others write them - such as Carl Ellsworth's cringe-inducing Halloween (great concept, poor execution) it's hard to over look. Everything about this episode is sexist, but I think the writer intended on commenting on it? It works and doesn't work. Best thing about it was Giles and Ethan Raine. But everything else, Cordy's skin tight cat costume, Willow's skin tight costume, and Buffy's low cut Southern Bell get up inclusive of the accent were cringe. Plus we have Xander in the hero role, along with Giles, who typically aren't. It didn't work. And I can see why Ellsworth didn't stick around as a writer.
What's My Line - has similar issues. They push against it for the most part, but then we have Kendra. Sigh. Where to start? The accent? She's from Africa, and arrives in the cargo hold (obviously meant to be a mislead). The insanely tight and sexy outfit? She has no clothing with her? And is treated like an object? I get the writers were trying to make a point, but I think it was a bit too on the nose, and cringe to boot.
Also, both Cordelia and the lady next door fall for the creepy guy with the free cosmetics samples. Just no. Can we be any more sexist? Cordy throughout the episode is depicted in a sexist and demeaning manner - except for her one-liners against Xander, which made me like her despite myself. Actually the surprising thing about this rewatch? Is how much I appreciate and like Cordelia. Charisma does an excellent job of making the character likable and relatable, despite Whedon's efforts to do the opposite. Upon re-watch, Cordelia is more likable than Xander, and he fully deserves every put down she sends his way. It's very hard to feel sorry for Xander. And Brendan plays him with a bit too much edgy entitlement. (Xander does not age well.) I recently discovered that Ryan Reynolds had originally been tapped to play the role (from Two Guys, a Girl and a Pizza Place) but wisely turned it down. Ever since, I've wondered if he may have provided more vulnerability to it? I still think the role was better suited to a someone who looks nerdy - like the guy who played Jonathan? Brendan, at 6'2, 25 years of age, dark headed, and muscular, is far too sexy and pretty to play nerdy guy. He also doesn't look like a high school kid, but then none of them did. The costume and wardrobe department go out of their way to make Xander and Willow look nerdy and geeky.
Will state that Buffy gets a better wardrobe and hair style in season 2. Either they got more money, or a better wardrobe department.
4. Daredevil Born Again
I liked the season finale, and for the most part the series. It's similar yet different than Netflix's Daredevil, which had defter writing. However both are fairly uneven.
Fisk is clearly Marvel's commentary on the Fascist asshole in the White House or the Hitler Wannabee. Fisk even kind of looks like him, without hair. And that makes watching this - an odd experience.
The message at the end is Daredevil can't take on Fisk alone, which sets up S2 to be more of a group effort. People are speculating already on who will be joining the cast. Already slotted are Karen and Frank Castle (Jon Bernthal) aka The Punisher. Also Lily Taylor, and Mathew Lillard in a recurring role.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 09:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 12:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 05:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 07:44 pm (UTC)I think we can all agree that her accent is atrocious? Even Bianca Lawson hated that accent and struggled with it. It's not Trinidad - because I have co-workers from Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica. And she doesn't sound like them at all.
How recently did you visit Trinidad and Tobago?
NYC has a heavy Caribbean population. I've had a Jamaican boss, the guy who has the office next to my boss is Jamaican. I have security guards from Trinidad, and various other co-workers. Her accent is closer to Nigeran, actually, but a very mangled Nigeran.
It was a horrible choice and cringe upon watching. Doesn't date well at all.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 12:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 02:40 pm (UTC)Buffy fandom had some diehard Xander fans, some of which were bullies. (I was on the receiving end of their venom more times than I can count. The Spike haters were the most annoying. ("Oh my boyfriend or friend's boyfriend was a horrible abuser like Spike, how can you like him? Xander is the good guy!" ))
There were three factions: Spike/Spuffy fans, Angel/Bangle fans, and Xander, Bander fans. All three had their issues. The worst were Xander/ Bander and Bangle - mainly because by 2022, it was pretty clear neither was going to get what they wanted. They felt disenfranchised and were unhappy and were sigh, self-righteous about it. (Self-righteous fans are the worst.) And they thought if they bullied everyone on the boards? They'd get it what they wanted. (Can't think why? (sarcasm).) They even tried to bully the writers into doing it on various boards. But alas, it only resulted in the writers either getting pissed off at them or ruthlessly mocking them in the show, sometimes a bit too obviously.
It didn't work - because there were things going on behind the scenes that they weren't privy to
(Nick Brendan, unknown to his fans, was in reality a raging and wickedly mean alcoholic, which his friends, cast-mates, first wife and family had been hiding - it's why he's kind of sloppy and heavy in later seasons, it's also why he wasn't in Conversations with Dead People (he showed up drunk to work and Whedon made him take a break)), and the direction of both the storyline, and characters, plus two separate shows on separate networks prevented it (Angel was on his own series which was as you know, on WB, and Buffy was on UPN. It just wasn't lucrative to put Buffy/Angel together long term or interesting to any of the writers involved, plus ratings dived when they were together and soared when they were apart). It was either accept the inevitable or stop watching. Bulling and campaigning wasn't going to get them anywhere. And it didn't.
It was aggravating to watch. The problem with fandom is sigh, the whiny bullies.
But yes, it's kind of amusing to see podcasts now ripping apart Xander, partly because the portrayer is (putting it kindly) such a lost soul.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 03:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 10:39 pm (UTC)There were rumors, but nothing substantial until a good ten to fifteen years after the show ended. There are actually rumors on the entire cast. I think the only two who escaped unscathed are Emma Caulfield and Amber Bensen from the main cast.
Most of them though are just fans who got their egos hurt, or had a grudge. (Fandom is kind of toxic in that respect.) Or backstage gossip from crew members who had grudges against various actors. A lot is taken out of context. For example? Marsters wrote a song for either ED or MT to turn them down gently (it stated they were very attractive but far too young for him), and fans took it the wrong way. (Marsters was in his early 30s when Buffy began, MT and ED were teenagers.)
And the whole CC, David Greenwalt, WB and Whedon mess - I've heard five different versions of. I do believe Whedon bullied Charisma, and I think Greenwalt did protect her for a while. But, I also think CC was having a secret affair with DG, and her son is most likely his. And Whedon knew it.
Also that the WB was fed up with DG & CC's backstage affair and antics, and wanted to fire both DG and CC by the end of S3, and asked Whedon to get rid of them. They were costing the WB a lot of money in delayed production time, and backstage issues. Dochawk told me all of this in November of 2002 at a dinner with Anom in NYC. Apparently Dochawk's best friend was the production assistant to David Greenwalt, and knew all about it. (He would.) Not only that? Dochawk spoiled me on the whole Cordelia arc. He told me exactly how Whedon was planning on writing Cordelia out, and why CC getting pregnant screwed it up, and what they were doing as an alternative. He also told me why he was writing her out, and that she was fired and not coming back. So, I was completely spoiled for S4 Angel, I knew what they were doing up until the last two-three episodes. I didn't believe him - until the shows aired, and I thought damn.
Then everything else came out. And I started putting the pieces together. It's a convoluted mess - that Whedon handled badly and how he handled CC was...atrocious.
But, there's a reason CC doesn't talk about it, and DG has remained silent.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 10:54 pm (UTC)Maybe someone (you? :)) will someday write a book "Backstage on BtVS". Sounds like it could be spicy.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-24 02:20 pm (UTC)Besides, I'm not a primary source. So, it really is just gossip.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-24 03:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 09:36 pm (UTC)That's interesting to know about Ryan Reynolds, but what was with the casting of these very attractive people to play unpopular nerds? Completely agree that Danny Strong would have made more sense (and having met him soon after Angel ended, I can say that his own attractiveness was really downplayed for the role).
That's an interesting thought about how the romantic hero was never played to become a turncoat. You're right that what was much more common was a guy who is supposed to be a bad guy who is later revealed to be misunderstood or the victim of someone's vendetta against him, so he becomes "good" and a romantic hero. I am currently rewatching Veronica Mars and found it interesting how very ambivalent the romantic partners she has are (even her friends, for that matter). Of course, the show was intended to be teenage noir so it fits well, just as Buffy exists in an environment of morally corrupt characters. But then Buffy paved the way for Veronica.
no subject
Date: 2025-04-23 10:14 pm (UTC)It was very much a network thing, or that's my guess? I watched The TV Set - a film about trying to get a television show on the air - a long time ago, and the most interesting bit was the commentary at the end between Judd Apatow, David Duchovny, and someone else (whose name I forget) - where Apatow goes into detail about casting for Freaks and Geeks in the 1990s. How he had to fight the network to get actual teens in the roles, specifically in the Geeks. He talked about how the network had a list of things they had to do. Whedon had similar issues - he wanted Bianca Lawson apparently as Buffy or Cordelia, and the network nixed it.
I honestly think the network tests audiences, and decides that pretty people sell a show. It saw Buffy as a show directed towards tween girls, and there should be hot guys on it.
. I am currently rewatching Veronica Mars and found it interesting how very ambivalent the romantic partners she has are (even her friends, for that matter). Of course, the show was intended to be teenage noir so it fits well, just as Buffy exists in an environment of morally corrupt characters. But then Buffy paved the way for Veronica.
Pondering whether I agree.
Buffy wasn't really noir to start with though, like Veronica Mars? Otherwise, yes, Buffy paved the way for it. And the writer in a lot of ways pays homage to Whedon and Buffy throughout, and Veronica Mars is quippy and snarky just like Buffy.
That said? Buffy definitely gets more noir as it goes. The Pack in S1, along with Out of Sight Out of Mind screams noir. And Whedon definitely started going there, or rather Greenwalt prodded him in that direction as did the other writers with Spike, Ethan Raine, Giles, Dru, Jenny Carpenter, and Angel. There are also episodes in Buffy that I would definitely describe as horror/noir. Heck both Angel and Spike fit the noir romantic hero trope.
I honestly think most of Whedon's writing fell into horror/noir which may be the reason for such mixed reactions to it. Noir is kind of controversial? And it explores a lot of controversial themes?
That's an interesting thought about how the romantic hero was never played to become a turncoat. You're right that what was much more common was a guy who is supposed to be a bad guy who is later revealed to be misunderstood or the victim of someone's vendetta against him, so he becomes "good" and a romantic hero.
Yeah, I think I've seen the romantic hero flip a few times - but usually its in comics or fairy tales, and it's usually because of a magic spell or possession or he's cursed (aka Beauty and the Beast trope) - and doesn't last long. Angel was interesting because he flips when the "Curse" is lifted. He's only good (well good is a relative term here) when the curse is intact. Whedon completely subverted that trope. They have to curse him to make him ...not evil.
Spike's character is more common. That's done a lot. The Rogue with the heart of Gold. It's basically the Beauty and the Beast Trope. They did subvert it in a few ways, and made it noirish, but it's a common trope.