(no subject)
Apr. 21st, 2010 10:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatThings amusing me at the moment:
1. Lost - was actually enjoyable this week. Not a lot happened. They are basically building up to the grand finale. So a lot is being rushed. This happens a lot on tv shows, they spend a lot of time telling us what we already know, then rushing on the more interesting, end-game points. Making me wonder about the huge disconnect between writers and viewers of their work? I've been seeing this a lot lately. May write more later. But bed calls. So no time. Lost- still feels a bit a like a funky and somewhat failed logic game to me, plot-wise, but explaining why requires a lot more brain energy than I really want to expend at the moment.
2. Buffy/Angel Comic Fandom has exploded over how the comic book writers are currently depicting their beloved and favorite characters. This is by the way is not a new phenomena nor limited to Buffy fandom or comics, specifically. I've seen similar explosions over soap opera characters, X-men comics, literary characters, and film characters. Does anyone remember how fandom wanted to tar and feather George Lucas for ruining Star Wars with the introduction of Jar Jar Binks, the re-editing of the prior films, and how he ret-conned Han Solo? Or how about Arthur Conan Doyle who got raked over the coals for daring, daring, to kill of Sherlock Holmes? Want to something even nuttier? Fans of Dorothy Dunnett's Chronicles of Lymond - initially refused to finish the last novel, Checkmate, and wrote angry letters to the writer - because they were convinced she'd killed the title character. (This boggled my mind. The final chapter was three pages long. And it was revealed that he was alive on the first page. All they had to do was turn the frigging page. Presumed dead on one side, alive on the next. It's not about being spoiled. Geeze. If you've made it through 800 pages of a book and only have three to go...or that very least, read ahead. Clearly not everyone has common sense.) And do not get me started on adaptations of novels - the fan outrage over the Keira Knightly Pride & Prejudice is legendary. Personally, I liked the film, but shhhh...don't tell them that.
Note to writers - most of your readers (there are exceptions of course but not many) really don't give a shit about you, they care about the fictional characters you have written or are taking over from someone else, and more to the point what you are doing with them. Take on a beloved fictional character at your peril dear writer - even if you created it, because now that character lives inside your fans imaginations and they will fight for the character's rights. If they don't like what you are doing, watch out. Wait? What? You thought they were your fans??? HAH! Noooo, you poor deluded soul, you don't exist - except as the Godlike creator to rail against and rescue their beloved character from. If you died, they might shake their heads in remorse, but only because your fictional character may have died with you. It's a rare writer who has fans who follow him and not his characters.
Have to admit am rather amused by the flailing at Willingham. (It's regarding his treatment of Spike, which bothers others more than it does me for some reason. Maybe because I find it really hard to take any of it seriously or Willingham for that matter - be a bit like I don't know taking Sarah Palin or Rush Lumbaugh or Glenn Beck seriously - much better to ignore the blowhards of the world, don't you think? If you ignore them, they will eventually go away. And all it's doing is making me happy I gave up on the IDW comics until Lynch comes back.) I don't like Willingham. He's a misogynistic bastard who thinks women are toys for his pleasure. Think Rush Lumbaugh but as a comic book geek, and you get my drift. I couldn't make it through Fables. Which was odd, since I happen to love stuff like that. So - Willingham even went past my limits of endurance. Bought first issue of Angel that he wrote? And promptly threw it out. Crap on a stick. Boring. And Spike was barely in that one. Bad dialogue. Sloppy art. And bad characterization. Not worth my time or money. Plus the guy is an ass. Sorry, buddy, you're never gonna be Alan Moore. You just don't have the stones.
Whedon, I've a bit more respect for, even if his comics currently feel like the twisted brain child of Salvadore Dali and Alan Moore on Crack. Whedon is not an ass. A bit whiny perhaps...but no worse than Russell T Davies or any number of other sucessful tv writers that I can think of. Brad Meltzer on the other hand - is an ass, and sort of falls within Willingham territory. And I still prefer Franco Urru to George Jeanty as an artist and a person, even if Jo Chen kicks both their asses to hell and back in the artistic department. Hire more women artists fellas! You'll have more readers. Trust me.
3. Glee - enjoyable episode about Madonna - which even Madonna appreciated. Don't see why not - was quite the homage. Also highly satirical - which is Madonna in some ways. Main impression though? Madonna's music really does sound all alike. That's the problem with Madonna - you listen to a tape of it and you feel like you've listened to the same melody just with different arranging and words for fifty minutes. There's no chang-up. No variation. Don't get me wrong, I like Madonna, quite a bit actually. But...she's not as good a musician/songwriter as she is a performer. That said - rather loved some of the renditions. Missed the one I really really wanted to see - the butch boys singing "What it Feels Like to be A Girl" - because American Idol went too long, so as a result, I got ten minutes of American Idol and lost ten minutes of Glee. Ugh. Oh well, it will be repeated at some point. Or it will appear on youtube. Other main impression? Ryan Murphy really has been reading people's blogs on Glee. (He said they were reading people's blogs on Glee and taking their fans suggestions on how to better the series to heart.) Until this episode, I didn't believe him. But it was obvious here - the shout-outs to female empowerment and how men view it as being all about them, and all about sex, and their getting sex - was quite amazing. Also there's a whole bit about how being a virgin is not a bad thing or something to be embarrassed about. And causal sex not the best thing ever! Hollywood? TV writers everywhere??? Please take notes. Thank you.
1. Lost - was actually enjoyable this week. Not a lot happened. They are basically building up to the grand finale. So a lot is being rushed. This happens a lot on tv shows, they spend a lot of time telling us what we already know, then rushing on the more interesting, end-game points. Making me wonder about the huge disconnect between writers and viewers of their work? I've been seeing this a lot lately. May write more later. But bed calls. So no time. Lost- still feels a bit a like a funky and somewhat failed logic game to me, plot-wise, but explaining why requires a lot more brain energy than I really want to expend at the moment.
2. Buffy/Angel Comic Fandom has exploded over how the comic book writers are currently depicting their beloved and favorite characters. This is by the way is not a new phenomena nor limited to Buffy fandom or comics, specifically. I've seen similar explosions over soap opera characters, X-men comics, literary characters, and film characters. Does anyone remember how fandom wanted to tar and feather George Lucas for ruining Star Wars with the introduction of Jar Jar Binks, the re-editing of the prior films, and how he ret-conned Han Solo? Or how about Arthur Conan Doyle who got raked over the coals for daring, daring, to kill of Sherlock Holmes? Want to something even nuttier? Fans of Dorothy Dunnett's Chronicles of Lymond - initially refused to finish the last novel, Checkmate, and wrote angry letters to the writer - because they were convinced she'd killed the title character. (This boggled my mind. The final chapter was three pages long. And it was revealed that he was alive on the first page. All they had to do was turn the frigging page. Presumed dead on one side, alive on the next. It's not about being spoiled. Geeze. If you've made it through 800 pages of a book and only have three to go...or that very least, read ahead. Clearly not everyone has common sense.) And do not get me started on adaptations of novels - the fan outrage over the Keira Knightly Pride & Prejudice is legendary. Personally, I liked the film, but shhhh...don't tell them that.
Note to writers - most of your readers (there are exceptions of course but not many) really don't give a shit about you, they care about the fictional characters you have written or are taking over from someone else, and more to the point what you are doing with them. Take on a beloved fictional character at your peril dear writer - even if you created it, because now that character lives inside your fans imaginations and they will fight for the character's rights. If they don't like what you are doing, watch out. Wait? What? You thought they were your fans??? HAH! Noooo, you poor deluded soul, you don't exist - except as the Godlike creator to rail against and rescue their beloved character from. If you died, they might shake their heads in remorse, but only because your fictional character may have died with you. It's a rare writer who has fans who follow him and not his characters.
Have to admit am rather amused by the flailing at Willingham. (It's regarding his treatment of Spike, which bothers others more than it does me for some reason. Maybe because I find it really hard to take any of it seriously or Willingham for that matter - be a bit like I don't know taking Sarah Palin or Rush Lumbaugh or Glenn Beck seriously - much better to ignore the blowhards of the world, don't you think? If you ignore them, they will eventually go away. And all it's doing is making me happy I gave up on the IDW comics until Lynch comes back.) I don't like Willingham. He's a misogynistic bastard who thinks women are toys for his pleasure. Think Rush Lumbaugh but as a comic book geek, and you get my drift. I couldn't make it through Fables. Which was odd, since I happen to love stuff like that. So - Willingham even went past my limits of endurance. Bought first issue of Angel that he wrote? And promptly threw it out. Crap on a stick. Boring. And Spike was barely in that one. Bad dialogue. Sloppy art. And bad characterization. Not worth my time or money. Plus the guy is an ass. Sorry, buddy, you're never gonna be Alan Moore. You just don't have the stones.
Whedon, I've a bit more respect for, even if his comics currently feel like the twisted brain child of Salvadore Dali and Alan Moore on Crack. Whedon is not an ass. A bit whiny perhaps...but no worse than Russell T Davies or any number of other sucessful tv writers that I can think of. Brad Meltzer on the other hand - is an ass, and sort of falls within Willingham territory. And I still prefer Franco Urru to George Jeanty as an artist and a person, even if Jo Chen kicks both their asses to hell and back in the artistic department. Hire more women artists fellas! You'll have more readers. Trust me.
3. Glee - enjoyable episode about Madonna - which even Madonna appreciated. Don't see why not - was quite the homage. Also highly satirical - which is Madonna in some ways. Main impression though? Madonna's music really does sound all alike. That's the problem with Madonna - you listen to a tape of it and you feel like you've listened to the same melody just with different arranging and words for fifty minutes. There's no chang-up. No variation. Don't get me wrong, I like Madonna, quite a bit actually. But...she's not as good a musician/songwriter as she is a performer. That said - rather loved some of the renditions. Missed the one I really really wanted to see - the butch boys singing "What it Feels Like to be A Girl" - because American Idol went too long, so as a result, I got ten minutes of American Idol and lost ten minutes of Glee. Ugh. Oh well, it will be repeated at some point. Or it will appear on youtube. Other main impression? Ryan Murphy really has been reading people's blogs on Glee. (He said they were reading people's blogs on Glee and taking their fans suggestions on how to better the series to heart.) Until this episode, I didn't believe him. But it was obvious here - the shout-outs to female empowerment and how men view it as being all about them, and all about sex, and their getting sex - was quite amazing. Also there's a whole bit about how being a virgin is not a bad thing or something to be embarrassed about. And causal sex not the best thing ever! Hollywood? TV writers everywhere??? Please take notes. Thank you.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-04-22 05:52 pm (UTC)Part of the problem LOST has is how commited the writers are to their structure--i.e. write one episode centring around each character, for most of the season. This meant that the sideways!verse stories mostly crawled, because not many of those stories were particularly interesting. And this was true of the flashbacks and flashforwards as well. The fact that each episode has only one protagonist gets in the way of what should be ensemble storytelling, and most characters end up being reduced to one or two character traits or incidents that define them--like Jack and needing to "fix" things, or Sayid being put in a situation where he has to be a torturer/killer again, or Locke being conned by his father or a father-analogue, or whatever. They do sometimes tell good stories about the individual characters but to me they don't do so often enough.
The Willingham thing amuses me. I personally don't care what he thinks. I think it's a shame that what he is saying is upsetting fans. It wouldn't be so bad if he just were a writer who misunderstands the characters greatly--this is the thing about (i.e.) Jeanty, whose comments about Buffy/Spike are hilariously off, but who seems sincere and not trying to create problems and/or demean fans. But again--not really a problem for me, because I don't really care what IDW is doing.
I like what I see of Whedon as a person, mostly. I agree that he can get too whiny. I feel sometimes like you can tell he's trying to hold it back in some interviews, and then finally lets out his frustrations (some understandable, others not as much) in other ones. He's trying I think to be polite, but he's very passionate about his work. There's a lot of speculation of troubles between him and SMG or Charisma Carpenter but it's very difficult to assign blame or whatever from our perspective--and there's really no reason to try, since there's no way we'll get all the facts. At any rate, I like him more as a writer than as a person (some glitches aside), which is fine--it's not like I'm ever going to meet him.
no subject
Date: 2010-04-22 11:56 pm (UTC)Part of the problem LOST has is how commited the writers are to their structure--i.e. write one episode centring around each character, for most of the season. This meant that the sideways!verse stories mostly crawled, because not many of those stories were particularly interesting. And this was true of the flashbacks and flashforwards as well. The fact that each episode has only one protagonist gets in the way of what should be ensemble storytelling, and most characters end up being reduced to one or two character traits or incidents that define them--like Jack and needing to "fix" things, or Sayid being put in a situation where he has to be a torturer/killer again, or Locke being conned by his father or a father-analogue, or whatever. They do sometimes tell good stories about the individual characters but to me they don't do so often enough.
Exactly. That's the problem. They are too wedded to their structure, and it is beginning to get in the way of the narrative. I've seen this happen in novels as well - where the structure overshadows the tale and the reader ends up bored or distanced from the tale itself. A lot of writers got obsessed with their gimmicks. It happens a lot in genre fiction, but I've seen it in experimental narratives as well. William S. Burroughs comes to mind, as does Thomas Pynchon and William S. Gaddis.
The Willingham thing amuses me. I personally don't care what he thinks. I think it's a shame that what he is saying is upsetting fans. It wouldn't be so bad if he just were a writer who misunderstands the characters greatly...
It's even more amusing when you know there's a discernible pattern emerging behind it. Willingham has a habit of taking over an established writer's story, doing his own weird twist, pissing off the fans who hate that twist, and then going to war with them online about it. When he would be a lot better off keeping his mouth shut. He amused me greatly when he blew a gasket over the whole Twilight thing. Hee.
Agreed on Whedon as well.
At any rate, I like him more as a writer than as a person (some glitches aside), which is fine - it's not like I'm ever going to meet him
Agreed. I feel the same way. I really don't want to know the guy behind the curtain. Been there, done that. I read/view Whedon because I find the writer interesting. He's flawed, but aren't they all? ;-)