(no subject)

[shadowkat]

[ETA: found a new icon of Ayra from Game that I really like.]


Okay, my brain hurts...is it time to go home yet? ;-)

LJ brainless question of the day:

What is your favorite cult film, and why?

At the moment? Buckaroo Bonzai - Adventures Across the 8th Dimension.
Although Tremors comes in close second. Not sure Blade Runner counts as a cult film - if it does, then definitely that - since I actually own it on DVD.

I don't feel like explaining why. Figure it out for yourselves.

Speaking of taste issues? The whole Buffy S5-7 vs. Buffy 1-3 debate arises again.

Easy - if you are obsessed with high school stories and tween romance - you probably loved 1-3, if you are obsessed with stories about 20something angst, depression, abusive relationships, post and current college angst,
job frustration, and are either a frustrated psychology major or philosophy major at heart? You probably loved 5-7 and think S4 is the ultimate season. Although 3's stand-alone and Mayor/Faith arc had its appeal.

Hopeless romantic into Twilight novels? 1-3 only. (1-2 - I doubt they stuck around much after that.)Or casual fan into watching something not too deep. (there are exceptions of course, aren't there always?)

Cynics into Supernatural, BSG, Doctor Who, and tv shows like Game of Thrones and True Blood? 4-7 OR scholarly fan wanting to analyze the thing to death.
(also exceptions...ETA: some of these people love Doctor Who for example, which is far from cnynical.)

Then of course there are the weird people like myself who liked everything but the last 10 issues of the comics. We don't fit in any category and just look in bewilderment at the rest of you. ;-)

[ETA: Also should include people who liked all the tv series seasons but hated all the comics even though they masochistically read them anyway. And then there's the people who ignored the comics completely and loved all the seasons ...ETAA: Alright, I'm bound to have forgotten someone - so create your own little special category.]

And finally the folks who well liked all the seasons including all the comics...

Okay, not finally, there's also the people who think the show was about a cheerleader slaying vampires directed towards tween girls and just don't get the appeal. (Uh, no, that was the movie. But I can understand the confusion.)

In short try figuring out why people like what they like at your own risk.
Personally, I think it's impossible, without pissing everyone off and being proven to be an ass.

back to figuring out this change order request...then home again home again jiggedty jig.

Comments

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

Weeeell... you left out the people loving 1-7 but hating 8. ;-) Which is close to your own stance, i suppose - still, i feel misrepresented. ;-)

Thanks for a little lightheartedness!

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

But did you really hate all of S8? I mean be honest...if you did, you probably wouldn't stuck with it for four years. I keep saying I hate S8, but my own meta and reviews prove me wrong.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Although...I do know people who did read all of 8 and hated every minute of it.

So I'm inserting a fourth category - folks who loved all the seasons, and hated all of S8 (even though they read the comics).

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

Argh - leave your logic at home! ;-) This is fandom (and thus madness).

No, i didn't hate all of season 8. But the motifs and metaphors we got i neither wished for, nor needed them. It reads a bit like the (wet) dream of an adolescent male nerd - which, now that i mention it...

...anyways. There were tiny teeny bits of humour, and, well, insular comments on the human condition (a human condition i know way too much about already, being raised by rapists and massmurderers).

Otherwise, "a lark". Since i live in a farcial world already, i don't care much for farce in my fannish and intellectual mind. Also, if you piss in another woman's pool - do it in a smart way (-> "Twilight").

So. overall i don't like season 8. Hate - too strong a word (now that i had some weeks to cool the nerd-rage... ;-)).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm more or less on the same page as you are regarding S8.
While there are bits that aren't too bad...the overall plot, motif, thematic structure did not work for me at all. And discussing it and/or Whedon - leads me towards ranting. Nice to know I'm not alone in that department.;-)

It reads a bit like the (wet) dream of an adolescent male nerd - which, now that i mention it...

Sigh, it really does, doesn't it? Ooops..I gave in to the temptation to rant. Never ends well.

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

Ooops..I gave in to the temptation to rant. Never ends well.

Rant away! To quote the late William the Bloody: "It's good for the soul!" ;-)

(Also: See icon-made-for-season-8)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh...been there done that. ;-) (See reviews of issues 34-40).

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

The later seasons of Buffy, Firefly, and what I've heard about Dollhouse from people who both like and dislike it, all make me think that Whedon has an essentially selfish and fetishistic fascination with female pain, which he's kidded other people and possibly himself into thinking is consciousness-raising about the evils of sexism. I didn't watch Dollhouse because the whole thing seemed to me to be somebody grappling with his own moral discomfort about his sexual fantasies in a way too personal to be released to the public.

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

I only watched BtVS (and later AtS, for continuity reasons) and Aliens 4 (though i didn't know of Whedon's involvement at that time - i thought some whacky french scriptwriter made that LOL).

I only ever cared about BtVS considering that sample. Of course we cannot separate the author (and the audience) from the text, the historical, economical and societal context is important. The commodification of culture probably has a greater impact on the end result than possible fetishism of any individual involved in it's production.

Though, if it is true what you say, then Whedon at least tries to wrestle back "his" culture/history from the grips of economy (even if that reveals some less pleasant aspects about himself ;-)).

As any economic undertaking is a collaborative work, the end result is highly influenced not only by (self-aware) individuals, but the process for realization of the product which is a socialized/incorporated process (i mean "Vergesellschaftung", a term which gains a certain blur when translated into the english language) apart from the individuals.

As thus, the "Buffy comics" are necessarily extremely different from the "Buffy TV show". The overall narrative lost a lot in that. (The fetishism you speak of is only glimmering on the TV show, but glaring in the comics.)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

As thus, the "Buffy comics" are necessarily extremely different from the "Buffy TV show". The overall narrative lost a lot in that. (The fetishism you speak of is only glimmering on the TV show, but glaring in the comics.)

This. Agreed. The series, being a work with a completely different set of collaborators as well as a different medium with different editors/producers and constraints - did not quite fall into the same fetishitic examination of the victimized girl trope that the comics glaringly do. Dollhouse also to a degree fell into this trap.

I think it is a danger many male writers fall into when they write the victimized female trope. It's not unlike the white writer writing the poor disenfranchized or magical black trope.
While one should be able to write stories about strong female characters and female characters who overcome brutality and rape, regardless of their gender - one must be careful in how they write such stories. It is easy to fall into fetishness or self-indulgence. An example of the victimized girl trope done well may well be Girl with The Dragon Tattoo - where the writer wants to show us the reality of the abuse, the pain of it, and to condemn the abusers - exposing a power system in place that victimizes women, while at the same time showing the effects of that ...on both men and women, and showing that woman herself is not a victim and chooses not to be one or to be defined by those who have done this to her. On the other hand...the writer may fail in somewhat the same way Whedon does in providing the victimized girl with a kind older male mentor/aid. In Buffy - it is Giles. Then Spike. And to a degree Angel. In Angel - it is Wesely and to a degree Angel for Fred/Illyria. In Dollhouse - it is even more twisted, because the mentor/aid is also the tormentor/torturer (which is an interesting statement). And in
Firefly it is Malcolm Reynolds and Simon Tal. Girl falls into a similar trap - and that is clearly the male writer's fantasy, much like the white writer who has a white leading character save the poor black character. This fantasy...may be unintentional, even unconscious. But once upon the page - it has a disturbing effect on the audience...the person in power redeems themselves for aiding the person who is not, reaffirming, albeit unintentionally, that they are the ones in power and the poor weak victim never quite will be - well not without their aid and help. In Buffy - she was always the weapon, always beneath the male gaze - that's the message he ends with. It reinforces his own fantasy. It's still about him.
So while he is trying to tell us how horribly men treat women, and why they shouldn't do so - he is also getting off on the fact that he, a man, is doing this - he's saving or helping the victimized girl find her power. It's very similar to the whole white liberal guilt thing.

[norwie2010.livejournal.com]

I think it is a danger many male writers fall into when they write the victimized female trope. It's not unlike the white writer writing the poor disenfranchized or magical black trope.

When the privileged try to write, without shedding their privilege (at least intellectually), about the less privileged.

It is easy to fall into fetishness or self-indulgence.

What you write reminds me of Arno Schmidt, who once said that he prefers impotent male writers, since they don't fall into the "sublimated sexuality breaking through at inappropriate moments trap" (ie. "He rode down into the densely afforested valley..."): Vagina-Monster, much? Demons pierced by (phallic) trees? Bubblebaths in victorian manors? Buffy/Satsu sex with teddybears(!) on the floor?

It is all well and good to use the image of the "two trains meeting" as an injoke to prudery and sexual explosion - just, when your work is full of said sublimated sexual (male) fantasy... uhm, the funny kinda gets lost in that image.

You formulate these things very well. I mean, i certainly do not claim to know Whedon or his intentions (kinda looking at your last sentence, here ;-)) but the indulgence, fetishism, sublimated male sexual fantasy, .... it is all there in the comics (on the TV show - sometimes. Season 6 has it's "moments", but it actually tries to save itself. Female writer's influence, maybe?).

I mean, i have nothing against sexual fantasies. But please - IF you draw a Vagina-Monster - at least know what the fuck you're doing! (And then do something with that knowledge!) A little (self-)reflection goes a long way...

(Ok, so i ranted. Forgive?)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Ok, so i ranted. Forgive?)

Certainly. At least we are in complete agreement on this - which makes it easier to discuss. Never been a huge fan of debate to be honest. It's hard to do well on the net, without getting flustered. (I really don't want to get into another fight with the segment of the fandom that vehemently disagrees. Been there, done that, we finally had to agree to respectfully disagree. Which is why I tend to avoid discussing this. I respect their view, I just see it very differently. I may have to set up a filter at some point - to discuss Whedon and the comics with those similarly inclined, but I'm reluctant to do that - since it feels disingenuous.)

When the privileged try to write, without shedding their privilege (at least intellectually), about the less privileged.

Yes. This. I think Whedon forgets he's privileged. When he states that Buffy or the underpriveleged, small blond girl is his avatar he is being disingenuous. This is typical of the male nerd - they were made fun of in school, they see themselves as "victim" or the
"underprivileged" without power. But it's not true. Warren Meirs, Jonathan, and Andrew as well as Xander are perfect examples of the poor "woobie" male nerd - also shown in the classic film Revenge of the Nerds. They view themselves as the weak unprivileged, those being made fun of. Victimized. The Doctor Horrible. The short guy who doesn't get the blond cheerleader. We see this over and over in film and television. And to give Whedon a modicum of credit - he does appear to realize - at least he did in Dollhouse and in Buffy, albeit briefly, that the male nerd is not disenfranchised.
He still is higher up on the food chain than both women and persons of color. Whedon was born with privilege - he had opportunities both in film and television few women ever get. And he had an education that even fewer can aspire to - private schools in England and Film school in California.

He has, in truth, little in common with Buffy Summers. To call her his avatar is a bit like Bill Clinton calling the black man his.
It's offensive. And I think on a certain level, he knows that - or he wouldn't have created Warren Miers and Topher in Dollhouse (who in some respects are versions of the same character.)

It's easy to forget, I think, that you have privilege and someone else doesn't. I realized recently that it is easy for me to be color blind. I'm white. I don't have to worry about anyone judging me for the color of my skin. I have the skin color that is preferred by those in power. So, yeah, I can forget it. I have the privilege to forget. This is also true about gender. Men can afford to be gender blind. Women can't. Heterosexual men don't have to worry about being raped or sexually assaulted every time they go out, get drunk, and come home late. Women do. We always have to be alert to it. An example? My brother did not understand why I was so upset that someone had snuck into my apartment while I was asleep and stole my laptop. (Happened a few years back). He'd been robbed. It was just a lap-top. He did not get it. (I was thanking god that I hadn't been raped.) Or my father doesn't understand why I am afraid to live in certain areas of the city alone. They forget, because they can. That's privilege. It's not that they can't imagine it, necessarily, it's that they forget.

I mean, i have nothing against sexual fantasies. But please - IF you draw a Vagina-Monster - at least know what the fuck you're doing!

The Vagina Monster is difficult to ignore. As are the other things. While it's nice to make jokes and have fun, Whedon is a white man with privilege - playing with female hero who like it or not has iconic value to a group of people who do not have his privilege and do not have the wealth of heroes that he does. It is both disingenuous and irresponsible of him to take that story of female empowerment which he himself crafted and twist it to service male fantasy and humor, with an underlying and somewhat condescending message about female power icons. It makes me want to kick him.

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

I dunno, I just rewatched "The Big Bang" and I'd say Doctor Who is one of the least cynical shows on TV. Hell, one of the least cynical things in the world, all categories.

Apart from that, not bad. :)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Hee. That's probably true. Should go back and amend that.

[rahirah]

What about people who were ok with 1-2, loved 3-5, and are extremely ambivalent about 6-7?

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Yeah, well..I was bound to leave someone out...make your category.

There's also the people who were okay with 1-4, hated 5, loved 6-7.
And the one's who hated 1 , love 2-7. And of course the folks who loved 1-2, bored by 3-4, loved 5-7.

It's headache inducing, isn't it?

[owenthurman.livejournal.com]

Rochester? 1-3
Darcy? 5-7
Ashley Wilkes? 4

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh...not sure so much Darcy 5-7 as Rhett Butler or maybe Heathcliff (except with a sense of humor).

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I don't know if he's actually Heathcliff. Heathcliff focused his vengeance on the kids, friends, and spouse rather than Cathy.

Spike kept his obsession about his obsession. He didn't plot to let Xander drink himself to death and take possession of Dawn...

Just sayin'

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Rhett Butler then? I honestly don't think any of them are good fits. Angel fits more Doctor Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by way of Mr. Rochester and Max De Winter. Spike? Rhett Butler meets Han Solo
and Jack Sparrow by way of John Constantine with a little
Byron thrown in.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I can buy the Rhett Butler, John Constantine, Solo and Capt. Jack Sparrow combo with a bit of rock star, Good Omen's Crowley, and a dash of some sort of William-esque geek-in-hiding character that I cannot think of off the top of my head.

Can definitely see some Max DeWinter in Angel and I think Mr. Rochester has some overlap as well, except Angel's crazy ex in the attic is a crazy quartet of Dru, Darla, Spike, and Angelus.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agree on both.

Hmmm on the rock star? For some reason I see Billy Idol mixed with Crowley and Lord Byron (hopeless romantic and geek). (Oh, I do miss the Spikester, still my favorite male fictional character...and no, I don't think either Marsters or Whedon are solely responsible for creating him. I think he was a group effort.)

except Angel's crazy ex in the attic is a crazy quartet of Dru, Darla, Spike, and Angelus.

Word. So true.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

I see your point, but I only like Darcy and I adore S4. I do think there are a lot of Rhett things in 5-7, though, and I like him, too, so that works.

Surely there are some other literary heroes we can cite? I'm drawing a blank — too many movies.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Surely there are some other literary heroes we can cite? I'm drawing a blank — too many movies.

There are, but I'm also drawing a blank. Keep coming up with movies.

Maybe Lymond in Dorothy Dunnet's novels? Or one of the Three Musketeers? How about The Scarlett Pimpernell? Or...in comics,
John Constantine. In Shakespeare? Puck ...another blank.
Angel is definitely MacBeth.

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

I'm going to out myself — to the surprise of no one — by saying I like it all except the last 15 issues of S8 (and there were about 3 issues in there that were okay, too).

Re the Doctor Who thing, which you've already ETA'ed a bunch of times:

I went to the Gallifrey One Con a couple of months back, and they were making much of Craig Ferguson's video love letter to Doctor Who, entitled "The triumph of intellect and romance over brute force and cynicism". It was so sweet! I hadn't really thought about it in those terms, and I do think the Doctor is getting increasingly okay with brute force wielded on his behalf by others, but it is very different from the "let's blow shit up" take that we get too often here in the US. Not really adding to the convo, I'm afraid...

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Not really adding to the convo, I'm afraid...

Not true. I actually enjoyed your comment quite a bit.

I like it all except the last 15 issues of S8 (and there were about 3 issues in there that were okay, too).

You're in the weird group with me. Hee. Who is looking at everyone else in a state of bewilderment. (My reviews of S8 make it clear that I really only hated the last 15 or so issues. Up to that point, S8 was okay.)

The problem with fandoms regardless of the fandom, is people always like different seasons. There are Doctor Who fans who want try the new seasons, fans who hate RT Davies, fans who only like RT Davies arc...it's insane. I rather like Neil Gaiman's statement that people have vastly different tastes and you can't please everyone. What I loved about S6, I'm guessing someone else hated, and what I hated about S8, someone else may have loved. (shrugs)

[rebcake.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I don't get the Doctor Who balkanization. I'm not that invested, so it all looks fine to me. Except I only watch "New" Who (9th-11th Doctors). Gaiman is right, of course.

Nobody has answered your cult film question! I love too many to narrow it down, probably. D.E.B.S. is up there for me. Also, Yes, Nurse! No, Nurse! and an early Almodovar film, Labyrinth of Passion. (I may be a het girl, but I have a soft spot for queer cinema.) Here's an EW list of the 50 greatest, and Blade Runner and Buckaroo Bonzai are indeed on there, though not the ones I just mentioned. Tremors isn't either, and that's a great one!

http://www.filmsite.org/cultfilmsew.html

[beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com]

D.E.B.S. is up there for me.

I love D.E.B.S. It's absolutely ridiculous, but it knows it, and it's got so much heart that it works anyway.

"I am the GOD of Bingo!"

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

BtVS 1 - eh. Amusing, I guess.

2 - there's some interesting stuff there.

3 - some good stand alones. Overall arc could've been stronger.

4 - *yawn* There was potential and ... zzzzz Work up for Restless, though (and "Where the Wild Things Are" was just a pointless waste of my time!).

5 - I won't claim Joss is a genius. There are flaws. But... I really liked this one.

6 - There's some meat there. It's gnawed and at times unpalable and other times it has a distinct death-like stench... but there's something haunting under there too. So... mixed result. Nice try. Partially successful.

7 - Was anyone minding the store? I see the parts but I feel no passion and little continuity and it wastes a hell of a lot of time on a road to somewhere... I think. Maybe. If I squint and convince myself that there was some sort of arc there. Also heavily handicapped by largely wanting to bury their heads in the sand and not deal with the stuff unearthed in the characters in Season 6. No, Joss, you really can't just go home again.

Season 8 - not sure what the frell just happened, but I know I don't like it. And it makes me feel vaguely icky. Oh, and it looked really, really silly to boot.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Eh...I can't say I entirely disagree. While I loved watching S6 when it was airing, it's the season I find the hardest to rewatch, at least without cringing. Up until "Wrecked" - it's actually really good in places and highly rewatchable. After Smashed...it sort of droops downhill, until about Villians where it picks up speed again and becomes watchable. As good as Dead Things may well be, I find it very difficult to rewatch. Just as I find Seeing Red, Wrecked, Gone, Older and Far Away, Doublemeat Palace, Hells Bells, and As You Were difficult to rewatch - without cringing. But I admire the risks they took and it felt at times like watching a trapeze act without a net. It was also the first time during the series that I wasn't quite sure what they were going to do next. But can't say I like re-watching it much.

Season 7 was similar. The first five to ten episodes highly entertaining, everything after Showtime a bit Spotty. Although will state I find S7 more rewatchable than S6 - far less painful season also less risky. Caleb was a mistake. As was how they chose to depict the First, and Angel should have only appeared as the First, never himself. Or better yet as both.

The other seasons are equally spotty of course. My favorite continues to be S5 for some reason - just because of all the Seasons it's the only one that I enjoy 90% of the episodes and find it enjoyable to rewatch from start to finish. Even the weaker episodes don't make me cringe in quite the same way several episodes in 7 and 6 do. It had an emotionally satisfying ending. And an emotionally satisfying story for me.
Also it may be the only season that didn't have that much sexual violence...it's implied in places, but it's not as in your face as all the other seasons - so that may have something to do with it. (shrugs)

S4 - I thought the overall plot was silly and it never worked for me. Whedon sucks at sci-fi - his knowledge of it clearly comes from B movies and comic books. Cheesy F/X and cheesier scripts. When they weren't focusing on the whole Initiative military arc - which the writers clearly didn't understand - the season wasn't that bad. It had a handful of great stand-a-lone episodes: Hush, Who are You - This Year's Girl, A New Man, The Freshman, Something Blue, and Pangs - most of which were typically at the beginning of the season. For some reason in the latter seasons - the beginning of the season was stronger than the end. (Where the Wild Things Are - I basically fastforward through everything but the Spike/Anya scenes, Spike scenes, and Giles singing scenes - which make the story work.
Also Anya/Xander are quite good in that episode.)

Seasons 1-3 - feel increasingly juvenile to me. 3 is by far the strongest - with some interesting stand-a-lones such as The Wish and Dopplegangland. 1-2 - this story has been done so many times now that it feels cliche, and I'm not even sure any more who originated it. Girl meets dreamboat, he turns evil, they can't be together, she kills him...woe is me. There's maybe five or six episodes between those two seasons, most of which are in S2 - Spike and Dru definitely were the main attractions.
The episodes without them, with few exceptions, felt a bit like a warmed up version of Scooby Doo Where Are You meets RL Stine.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Oh, I still can't watch a great deal of Season 6. Just too damn painful. But I at least have a feeling in Season 6 that they were trying something so I give credit for having a goal even if I think that they bit off more than they could chew in the end. But, yeah, too painful to watch. I always remember some critic's review during Season 6 calling it "tv to slash your wrists by" and... yeah. Its kind of that. It's view of human nature is depressing as hell.

Season 7 was similar. The first five to ten episodes highly entertaining, everything after Showtime a bit Spotty.
I agree. re-watched most of Season 7 about a year ago and was surprised at first that it was better than I remembered. When it was initially dealing with the characters from the show, it actually felt like there was a there there. Then they started importing a boatload of potentials crowding up the place and never developing any of it really and it all just evaporated and then it draaaaaags (and just as passionless as I had remembered). Someone needed to remind him 'keep it simple, stupid.' Too much piling on with potentials and impossible to kill then easy to kill ubies and the screen got too cluttered to actually tell a coherent story about the characters that brought us to the story (see the same in Season 8... only on crack).

Whedon sucks at sci-fi - his knowledge of it clearly comes from B movies and comic books

This. God yes, this. Whedon desperately needs to stick with fantasy because he needs to be able to say 'magic!'. He has no interest in how things work. Now, sure, in sci-fi the science is actually a bit of story magic, but to make science fiction work, you have to have enough actual understanding of science to give your 'magic' a modesty patch. Sure, you're going to go well beyond what known science can support (it's fiction!) but you need enough science to give your fiction a leaping off point.

Joss clearly has zero fascination with science and so never, ever added that layer to it.

Stick to 'it's magic!' Joss. Really. People who do science fiction might not be using science, but you can tell there's some interest in it (and Star Wars isn't so much science fiction as it is a Space Opera... which makes it no less fun, but it has more in common with fantasy tropes than science).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Very much agree with everything you state above.

Had the same experience with both S6 and S7. S6 - you have to appreciate just for breaking the boundaries of its own genre and television in general. They literally drew outside the lines that season. And I agree, you have to give them credit for trying something new and having goal - even if they bit off far more than they could chew. Really painful to rewatch though. At the time I called it "six characters on the verge of a nervous breakdown or in the midst of a nervous breakdown." Talk about literally throwing all your characters off the cliff.

Someone needed to remind him 'keep it simple, stupid.' Too much piling on with potentials and impossible to kill then easy to kill ubies and the screen got too cluttered to actually tell a coherent story about the characters that brought us to the story (see the same in Season 8... only on crack).

Yes. Exactly. It's very hard to do this well. I think Whedon's biggest problem is he got a bit too ambitious and tried biting off more than he could chew, without taking the time to sit down and carefully plot out each character arc. Not just Buffy's.
The fact that he hadn't a clue what he was going to do with Spike or even Xander for that matter - should have been a wake-up call that he needed to scale back a bit. He's too fly by the seat of my pants or make it up as I go along - to be able to handle an epic story with a cast of thousands, multiple story-threads, and complex themes. The writers who do stories like that effectively are far more detail oriented than Whedon and take the time to actually chart out their characters journey's - examples are George RR Martin and the writers of Friday Night Lights. (While it is tempting to say Lost or BSG, they didn't quite pull it off either - just better than Whedon did.)

[atpo-onm.livejournal.com]

All seasons of BtVS were good. I go in not expecting perfection, so not that disappointed when they occasionally did something dimwitted. Even then, that would be dimwitted IMO, not necessarily someone else's.

Favorite seasons for me would be 2,3,4,6. I know many viewers place 6 at the bottom of their list, but I really thought what they did was daring and challenged the viewers. Had the weakest finale, though, but even then only by comparison. Whatever else one might say, Whedon could wrap things like crazy.

The main problem I have with Season 8 is not the story-- even the wacky space-sex-new-universe-as-the-baby parts-- but the medium itself. I think many fans went into it thinking it would be the next Watchmen or Promethea (which, BTW, it borrows heavily from thematically) and-- it wasn't.

All I have to do is watch any classic episode of the TV series, any season, and you have great writing and live actors that make it real, make you forget it's fantasy. Last week I happened to rewatch The Prom. Watched Gellar's face as they give out the "Class Protector" award. I've seen this ep maybe 10-12 times by now. I always choke up, and tears start to run down my face. No graphic novel, even the best, has ever done that to me. Great live acting does that.

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

Oh, S8 did not suffer from unsatisfiable fan expectations. Have you read Global Frequency, which is the SF/fantasy series I thought S8 should have been?

[atpo-onm.livejournal.com]

No, but if you recommend it, I'll try to check it out. Is this a graphic novel, or conventional book?

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

Two graphic novels written by Warren Ellis. They're both out of print at the moment, but I didn't have any trouble getting copies.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I think Whedon bit off more than he could chew in regards to S8.
Which is a criticism - I'd launch at both S7 and Dollhouse, to be honest. The writer didn't know what story he wanted to tell so instead of picking and sticking to one tale, tried to tell bits and pieces of several, and ended up with in incoherent and times incredibly disturbing mess. There was little communication in S8 between Whedon and the other writers, except briefly by email, no one knew the arc (I'm not even sure Whedon did) and it felt very much like his tv writing - fly by the seat of my pants.

He actually did a better job, believe it or not, with Astonishing X-men, which I'm starting to think may have more to do with the Marvel editors and less with Whedon. Whedon is a writer who needs a really good editor/co-writer or producer who is going to reign him in. His most successful projects had that.
Also - his most successful projects were "simple" not complex.
With not that many characters, just a small core cast.

I didn't expect all that much from the S8 comics, I certainly didn't expect Alan Moore. All I wanted was a fun, coherent, and interesting story that wrapped up hanging sub-plots - in a coherent manner - much like Whedon did with Astonishing X-men. (So we know he can do it.) And suffice it to say? I didn't get even that.

[local-max.livejournal.com]

How about like 1 and 7, love 2-5, love and obsessed with 6, and love 8 (but who feels like everyone thinks he's an idiot for doing so)? :)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I sort of included you under the "loves all the seasons and the comics...."

but who feels like everyone thinks he's an idiot for doing so)? :)

We don't think you're an idiot. It's just a matter of taste really. May be a bit bewildered. I admittedly can't see how anyone could like the S8 comics (well without squinting really hard.) But hey, I also don't understand how the Hangover can be the number one comedy in the US or the appeal of The Office...so.. And taste does change...if you look back over my journal entries, you'll see me contradict myself about five different times regarding Buffy.

[local-max.livejournal.com]

Oh, I missed that line!

In case it wasn't clear -- I was joking with my 'thinks he's an idiot' line and not at all talking about you. But it sounds more passive aggressive now that I read it back to myself, so I apologize if it came across that way -- tone is hard on the internet!

Agreed totally that taste is one of those things. There are quite a few times I scratch my head at the things some people I really respect believe are good. It's like, really? I can't stand that! But so it goes. Makes things interesting! :)

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

tone is hard on the internet!

Sigh. Yes. Particularly in regards to sarcasm. I was incredibly sarcastic on another thread - about Game of Thrones, and it went right over the person's head. They took me seriously and I was stuck. Because there was no way I could correct them without looking well...

There are quite a few times I scratch my head at the things some people I really respect believe are good. It's like, really? I can't stand that! But so it goes. Makes things interesting! :)

Don't know if you've been reading or seen Niel Gaiman's blog - he's a professional comic book, novelist, and television/film writer - who wrote on his blog recently that : people have vastly different tastes and he rather likes that, because it has made it possible for him to have a career in the creative arts.
I think it is true - our tastes are so varied. And how we think and perceive is as well. Not everyone picks up on or sees the same things. And tastes change. All you have to do is read my livejournal from 2003 to now, to see how drastically my tastes have changed. There are things I loved in 2009, that I'm critical of and hate now. And things I disliked, which I rather adore now.