Is Joss Whedon a one trick pony? by AngusThermopyle

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Is Joss Whedon a one trick pony?

POSTED BY: ANGUSTHERMOPYLE
UPDATED: Sunday, March 26, 2006 08:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 12565
PAGE 2 of 2

Saturday, March 25, 2006 1:55 AM

by the way, check this out:

That model took me 2 months and about 50 hours to create. And I was a beginner of 3D CGI when I started. Kinda proud of it. Some areas aren't as I'd have liked. When I can afford a new PC I'll start it again. Was a lot of fun though.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 1:58 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Oops, that's an earlier version, before I did the cargo hold and connected the neck and did the shuttles lol. Let me see here: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=1115278&Start=1&Artist=
flinch67&ByArtist=Yes

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:03 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:

I'll go with the Robin Hood thing. Yeh Inara is Maid Marion :) Ive never really fancied Inara, Ive always been a Yo-Saf-Bridge kinda guy but at the end of Serenity when she has no make-up on and she smiles at Mal my heart melted :)

Oh, you like Mrs. Reynolds, eh? I had to look her up lol. Thanks for your comments, by the way. Maybe it's a British thing...

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 2:38 AM

SERYN

No, I read everything you said, and unless teres been a new language invented, understood it all.

No, tell a lie I missed "Actually, it's more than insinuated, it's stated quite clearly."

questioning the fact in my own post, but... ah well, its hard to read when you're giggling.

oh, the word was 'Troll' not one I like to bandy about, cause most of the time its not applicable, its just jumping to insults.

Hmmmmm...

Quote:
I spoke about one episode and the issue it raised. I never said that the whole season was the same. You really should stop and take a closer look before you barge in with criticisms. How much of my post did you read before you wrote your reply? Ask yourself. I don't need to know the answer.

back up a bit -

Quote:
There seems to be this whole feminist, all men are misogynistic bastards thread running through everything he does

oh dear.

Quote:
Well, just thought I’d waste some of my day critiquing a few areas of Joss Whedon’s work. And I’m sure that there are going to be some rancorous replies to this one. Well, it’s all just a bit of fun, and it’s just TV, right? We’ll see, I guess…

Cat, pigeons, go get amongst 'em…

Skip to the end...

Quote:
I didn't post looking to win an argument, or even start one

Consistency, it lends an argument validity and backbone.

As for my own questioned consistency, I never said I admire JW because he stands up for women. I said I admire him because he creates good whole characters regarless of their gender and race. His treatment of women is equality, not 'hey, look how great women are, how sexy do they look swinging the big axes around'

His aim with Buffy, its been said, but it can be said again, was exploring the 'damsel' fighting back, yup, female empowerment, but that wasn't the be all and end all of Buffy, he was exploring duty and fate, and the rejection there of, what it means to have power...

In fact if anything, JW trick is the theme of 'created family'

but anyway, River was looking at a damaged human, what happens when you are treated that badly, how do you recover from that? And i'm absolutely certain that, if there was a man with Summers poise, grace, althletic ability, fragility and unique energy willing to play River, casting decisions would have been difficult.

If anything, River is almost sexless, she's not a sexual object, she's not an attraction for the crew, at the moment she is simply 'River' - she even has a unisex name.

As for taking things personal, no, if I took it personal, I wouldn't be laughing at this.

"until I got to the Billy episode. It really wound me up"

are you sure you can say the same?

Plus, I never said I was insulted, I said it was kinda insulting. maybe I should have clarified it with 'it could be found...'

My families just arrived, we're off to the park, I pick this up later.
**********************************************************
Hodgins: Your robot reminds me of you. You tell it to turn it stops. You tell it to stop it turns. You ask it to take out the garbage it watches reruns of Firefly.
FozzieWash, You know what I always say: sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug!
KermieMal, I never Know what the heck you're talking about.
FozzieWash, Hey, look! They're sending us free lumber!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:43 AM

CHRONICTHEHEDGEHOG

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
There seems to be this whole feminist, all men are misogynistic bastards thread running through everything he does. Speak for yourself, mate. I have never hit a woman nor even wished to. I’m also no feminist. I like women and I respect them. I understand that men and women are different and that men and women have different strengths and weaknesses. That’s why we need each other. I’m currently watching Angel season 3 again and I’d been thinking about writing this for some time, and thought I wouldn’t bother, until I got to the Billy episode. It really wound me up.

I think you're ignoring the fact that half the main cast of Buffy, almost the entire cast of Angel and the majority of firefly/serenity are in fact men. Though a little morally dubious, they're almost all heroes and champions. Working well with women. I don't know how you can say he's saying all men are mysoginists when I can only think of a few of his bad guys who are.

-------------------------------------------------

Read my fanfic!
http://www.fireflyfans.net/sunroomitem.asp?i=8267

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:15 AM

CARTOON

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
Who's going to draw the line, J? You, me, some Immam in Iran? The US President? Blair? How can anyone have that kind of power and not be Hitler?

The only person who can decide what is "offensive" to me is -- uh -- me.

And when I find something personally offensive, I avoid it.

While I personally believe that people should write what they like ("offensive" or not), I also believe that everyone has the right to disagree with and avoid what they find to be "offensive" -- without either expecting everyone else to agree with them that it's "offensive", or jump all over their face because they disagree with them.

Personally, (regarding this thread), I think a lot of your analysis about Joss makes sense. I'm not sure if I agree with all of it (particularly as I'm unacquainted with his other works -- and have no interest in acquainting myself with them), but you've hit upon some very interesting points.

I also think you are right on the mark about feminism trying to blur the distinctions between men and women. Men and women have many similarities, but they also have many ways in which they are quite different. I see no problem with recognizing the similarities. I do, however, get somewhat miffed when people deny the differences, and say that one gender is the same as the other, just in a different body.

Oh, and regarding the "English" language -- I totally agree with you (and I say that as an American). If someone is going to pilfer -- uh "borrow" someone else's tongue, they shouldn't go about changing it. However, for the sake of conformity with my fellow Americans (and for the fact that I was raised to spell in this aberant, Yankified manner), I generally do not adhere to my own belief that one doesn't corrupt a language that has not originated with one's own people.

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
mate, I don't think many sociopaths come online to discuss Joss Whedon...

You haven't been in here long, have you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 5:38 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by GORRAMREEVER:
My husband and I (and all our friends who are fans of buffy and Whedon) agree that Joss should have been born a lesbian.

Almost all straight men would be perfectly fine being lesbians. On the other hand that assessment comes from discussions with upper and middle class teenage boys mostly from America Spain, the Dominican Republic, and England. Hardly a random sample, and certainly not "men" in the strictest sense.

Also I'm not really fit to judge River is the character on Firefly that I feel closest to (except for the ass-kicking bit, but that's not really her, just something that was done to her.)

Still it's said that just as many girls go through a tomboy phase most boys, when they are very, very young have a phase where they want to be female, and no one can deny the straight male fascination with lesbians.

(Why do you think the "tomboy phase" of girls happens later in life than the want-to-be-female phase of boys? And why do you think that boys actually want to be female in their phase, where girls just emulate males? For that matter why are there phases at all? Why does anyone who is not transgendered ever feel the need to be like members of the opposite sex? Perhaps I should take a course in psychology.)

-

I've said too much about my thoughts on the matter, someone will soon be by to kill me with rocks. Still, it seems that it is largely artificial constructs that stop straight guys from liking lesbians yet it is actual revulsion that drives them from gay men. (Human beings are fucked up in far too many ways.)

I'm just begging to be killed with rocks, aren’t I. I'll shut up now.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:26 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
I generally do not adhere to my own belief that one doesn't corrupt a language that has not originated with one's own people.

Have you ever been to France, or Spain for that matter?

Who are they do destroy Latin? If no one corrupted a language that did not originate with them none of the languages that we know and love, or know and hate, would exist today.

English itself comes only from collecting and corrupting several languages. We certainly did not originate Latin yet we've happily corrupted it both directly and through French. Just look at the roots of, "demand," that is not only stolen but corrupted beyond all meaning.

On the other hand possible is not far from it's roots in Latin.

Language is the art of taking other peoples words and adapting them to your own region and culture, to attempt to assign origins is not appropriate because few if any languages are in the hands of their originators.

American English is American English, it was originated in America and has just as much birthright of corruption as Parisian French, more actually since Americans in large part are actually directly descended from the originators (though perhaps "collectors" would be a better word) where the Parisians are simply descended from corrupters.

If you want and language corrupted only by it's originators try Elvish or Klingon. You will not find one that people actually use in the real world. Or at the very least not one that is spoken as a first language. Besides, are you honestly claiming that the English have no right to the word "robotics" they didn't make it after all.

And what about the word Aluminium? My British dictionary (I only have one as it seems more useful to buy local dictionaries that use the local language) defines the word as "A modification of the word ALUMINUM the name given by it's discoverer." are you telling me that the person who invented the word has no right to the word? You call American English an aberration does that mean that the fact that it uses the word as it's originator intended is also and aberration and the corruption of that word by those who didn't create it is not an aberration?

There are of course other examples like this, but Aluminium is one often pointed to as a difference between American and British English, though most claim that to use it as its creator intended is an aberration.

But I hardly think that logical, and because you defined the originators as those with the right to the word I doubt you think it logical either.

But where are we then? Are we left with the idea that American English is mostly aberration though in some cases closer to correct than British English (I know I started off saying English English but I don't have a dictionary that is limited only to English as spoken in England, I've just got my British one.)

Is British English partially an aberration. Where is the line drawn? Is there no place on earth that speaks an English that is not an aberration? After all by your standards no one but the originators have the right to change it, yet non-originators have already changed the language as spoken in the land of originators.

-

In my mind all languages are aberrations (I still want to know the answers to my question in your mind though) and these things should be celebrated, there are things that you simply can not say in English, and there are things in English that you can not say outside of it. Were it not for aberration on top of aberration we would not be able to say these things at all.

American English is evolving to meet the experiences that need to be communicated by Americans, and to stop it would be to stifle and disrespect English as a whole. At the same time the English on the islands across the pond evolved to meet the needs of its own people.

The dialects spoken in England violate the English language in ways that would make my copy of The Oxford English Dictionary (a source that I feel confident turning to for all variations of English) blush, yet those violations may already be in the most recent edition.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:38 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

AngusThermopyle

Great post, I must admit. I agree to your several points to varying degrees. Joss DOES seem to play the often mentally traumatized, ass-kicking teenage girl card a few too many times. There's Buffy. Though not overly traumatized any more than most hot teenage girls, she does bear the burden of being a slayer. Then there's Faith ( Buffy and Angel ) Then there's Dana, and Bethany(Season 2) from Angel. Throw in Fred for good measure too. And of course there's River. The template Joss uses is a bit over played. Young, gifted girl has been taken away and had bad things done to her by bad people, and then is freed or escapes. Often to cause havok. Heck even Cordy fits that M.O., if you take into account her little trip to Pylea.

But hey, Joss must be doing something right to have us so well versed in these shows in the first place. How normal is it that so many of us can cite characters names and even episode titles from more than one series? If Joss has a sin, then it's a minor one of repitition. He's found something and has stuck w/ it. And we've kept watching.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:01 AM

CHARMUSE

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
[I'm English. That's what the language is called. Apologise is spelled like that in English English.?

Angus, my apology for being insensitive to language differences across the pond. It had not occured to me.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:14 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Ok Seryn, I'm gonna concede. I really can't be bothered. I can't believe you've gone through everything I've written on this very long thread just to find some inconsistencies. Of course I'm inconsistent. I'm human. We all are. I'm not going to go through all your posts and argue each point and point out all your inconsistencies. Life's too short! I made a point, you disagree. That's fine.

I certainly can say nothing personal. I can't see you laughing. When I pictured you, you had a sad face. That post must've taken ages to do. It's just not worth it. I still believe in most of what I said. Some things people have said have given me pause for thought.

Thanks for participating. Hope you had fun at the park.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:16 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by cartoon:
Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
Who's going to draw the line, J? You, me, some Immam in Iran? The US President? Blair? How can anyone have that kind of power and not be Hitler?

The only person who can decide what is "offensive" to me is -- uh -- me. And when I find something personally offensive, I avoid it.

While I personally believe that people should write what they like ("offensive" or not), I also believe that everyone has the right to disagree with and avoid what they find to be "offensive" -- without either expecting everyone else to agree with them that it's "offensive", or jump all over their face because they disagree with them.

Personally, (regarding this thread), I think a lot of your analysis about Joss makes sense. I'm not sure if I agree with all of it (particularly as I'm unacquainted with his other works -- and have no interest in acquainting myself with them), but you've hit upon some very interesting points.

I also think you are right on the mark about feminism trying to blur the distinctions between men and women. Men and women have many similarities, but they also have many ways in which they are quite different. I see no problem with recognizing the similarities. I do, however, get somewhat miffed when people deny the differences, and say that one gender is the same as the other, just in a different body.

Oh, and regarding the "English" language -- I totally agree with you (and I say that as an American). If someone is going to pilfer -- uh "borrow" someone else's tongue, they shouldn't go about changing it. However, for the sake of conformity with my fellow Americans (and for the fact that I was raised to spell in this aberant, Yankified manner), I generally do not adhere to my own belief that one doesn't corrupt a language that has not originated with one's own people.

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
mate, I don't think many sociopaths come online to discuss Joss Whedon...

You haven't been in here long, have you?

You got that right!

It's like the gorram reavers just landed...

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate them.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:16 AM

CHRISTHECYNIC

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The template Joss uses is a bit over played. Young, gifted girl has been taken away and had bad things done to her by bad people, and then is freed or escapes.

The world is made of variations on a theme, this I believe.

When you strip away all details everything is the same. The story of Alexander the Great is the same as that of Searching for Bobby Fisher.

What makes us keep watching these teenage girls is that the shows are not about them (Buffy would never be so loved with the rest of the characters) and certainly not about kicking ass.

Also there is no possible way to confuse them, River is not Buffy and will never be at all like her, Faith is not like either of them, and of all of the potential slayers you actually got to know (as opposed to background characters) in the end of Buffy none were interchangeable.

It is a template yes, but no more overused than the "standard American of indistinguishable but certainly Caucasian descent speaking in an accent that can not be placed beyond 'America' of positively normal physical strength and intelligence" template so often used.

As long as he concentrates on the characters they could all be played by the same person and we would not tire of them (though we might get very, very confused) because they would be both different and real.

The only problem with a template is when it becomes the character, instead of a starting point from which to build the character.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:20 AM

SERYN

its raining gorramit! bah!

nah, took me about two minutes.

well, longer, I was looking for a new mobile on ebay and chatting to my uncle as well.

But I think what I was trying to say is contradicting yourself doesn't lend your argument any wieght.

But yeah, one think I do agree with, this is getting really boring now, so...

**********************************************************
Hodgins: Your robot reminds me of you. You tell it to turn it stops. You tell it to stop it turns. You ask it to take out the garbage it watches reruns of Firefly.
FozzieWash, You know what I always say: sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug!
KermieMal, I never Know what the heck you're talking about.
FozzieWash, Hey, look! They're sending us free lumber!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:23 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
AngusThermopyle

Great post, I must admit. I agree to your several points to varying degrees. Joss DOES seem to play the often mentally traumatized, ass-kicking teenage girl card a few too many times. There's Buffy. Though not overly traumatized any more than most hot teenage girls, she does bear the burden of being a slayer. Then there's Faith ( Buffy and Angel ) Then there's Dana, and Bethany(Season 2) from Angel. Throw in Fred for good measure too. And of course there's River. The template Joss uses is a bit over played. Young, gifted girl has been taken away and had bad things done to her by bad people, and then is freed or escapes. Often to cause havok. Heck even Cordy fits that M.O., if you take into account her little trip to Pylea.

But hey, Joss must be doing something right to have us so well versed in these shows in the first place. How normal is it that so many of us can cite characters names and even episode titles from more than one series? If Joss has a sin, then it's a minor one of repitition. He's found something and has stuck w/ it. And we've kept watching.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

I couldn't agree more, AU. I certainly never said I didn't enjoy JW's stuff. On the other hand, I don't think I'd go and bye another JW series I hadn't already seen like I did with Firefly, which I think was a very worthwhile purchase.

Nice citing, by the way.

Well, things to do et cetera. Thanks for posting.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:24 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by charmuse:
Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
[I'm English. That's what the language is called. Apologise is spelled like that in English English.?

Angus, my apology for being insensitive to language differences across the pond. It had not occured to me.

Not necessary, but accepted. Thank you.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:31 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by seryn:
nah, took me about two minutes.

well, longer, I was looking for a new mobile on ebay and chatting to my uncle as well.

But I think what I was trying to say is contradicting yourself doesn't lend your argument any wieght.

But yeah, one think I do agree with, this is getting really boring now, so goodbye.

**********************************************************
Hodgins: Your robot reminds me of you. You tell it to turn it stops. You tell it to stop it turns. You ask it to take out the garbage it watches reruns of Firefly.
FozzieWash, You know what I always say: sometimes you're the windshield, sometimes you're the bug!
KermieMal, I never Know what the heck you're talking about.
FozzieWash, Hey, look! They're sending us free lumber!

If you go through every person's writings and musings on this thread you will find contradictions. We start off in one place, then we change as we see other POVs, or we just express ourselves poorly and don't say exactly what we felt or meant. No one is totally consistent, so therefore - by your reckoning - everyone's arguments lose weight. It's catch 22.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:52 PM

ANONYMOUS1

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE, So do you now understand that the silence in space is there in Serenity just as it is in Firefly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 7:21 PM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous1:
ANGUSTHERMOPYLE, So do you now understand that the silence in space is there in Serenity just as it is in Firefly.

I mean externally. I know that as Serenity breaks atmo the sound of the engines dies away inside the ship; but that's not what I meant. I was talking about external shots of the ship or other ships have no sound apart from music - Space being a vacuum and therefore not be able to carry sound etc. Watch any FF episode where Serenity accelerates off. No sound, just music. Or when the ship glides past the camera, no engine sound. In Serenity, when the ship is breaking atmo near the beginning, you hear the thrusters in external shot. That wouldn't have happened in FF. It made for a dramatic SFX shot, but was inconsistent with the TV series.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, March 25, 2006 10:23 PM

ANONYMOUS1

On Silence in space in Serenity and Firefly:

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
I mean externally. ... I was talking about external shots of the ship or other ships have no sound apart from music

So was I. Internally and externally. Space is silent in Serenity and Firefly. Watch the external shots again.

Quote:
Originally posted by AngusThermopyle:
In Serenity, when the ship is breaking atmo near the beginning, you hear the thrusters in external shot. That wouldn't have happened in FF. It made for a dramatic SFX shot, but was inconsistent with the TV series.

Watch this scene again.

Serenity in space. No sound. Only music. Ain't she beautiful?

Thrusters start to turn down. No sound. Front and bottom of Serenity start to glow. ATMO BURN. ATMO FRICTION. THERE MUST BE AIR FOR THAT. THEN THERE MUST BE SOUND externally and internally if you ship is not insulated enough. Note that you cannot hear the lightening inside the Alliance cruiser, but you can hear it outside.

You hear the ATMO BURN before the thrusters even fire up.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 1:19 AM

J6NGO1977

The only person who can decide what is "offensive" to me is -- uh -- me.

And when I find something personally offensive, I avoid it.

That's exactly my point. I can talk with a person and they can voice their opinion that 'Mrs Reynolds' is a better episode than 'Out of Gas'. I wont deny their opinion because they see it that way. I don't find it offensive. It is just a point of view different from mine and I wont say they are wrong. However if that same person where to say to me 'all muslims are terrorists' (by the way I am not Muslim in fact I have no religous beliefs at all), that person has stepped over a line and I will tell them they are wrong in what they are saying because for a start it is factualy incorrect and all a comment like that does is feed hatred. Never say a person is wrong or deny their opinions until you know they are wrong or moraly incorrect.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 3:26 AM

TANKIN

A few good points, but it seems to me you're generalizing off the basis of a few episodes. Judge as a whole. River is definitely not the another cliche version of Buffy. Like others said, he's been building her up since the series. Even the small intricate things like "They come in two, with hands of blue" or whatever it is she quotes -- if anyone notices, them be the people that're chasing after River and nearly catch her in Ariel. Nearly EVERYTHING River says is relevant to something in the series.
I think after every series he creates, he spots his errors and works on them. Buffy we had Druscilla, with her bizarre rantings which he gave in similiarity to River, although her rants actually have merit behind them; most are glimpses to what's about to happen, or has happened.
I don't think he's a one trick pony. Anyway I'd type more but I'm sick as a dog and going to bed. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, March 26, 2006 8:03 AM

ANGUSTHERMOPYLE

Quote:
Originally posted by Tankin:
A few good points, but it seems to me you're generalizing off the basis of a few episodes. Judge as a whole. River is definitely not the another cliche version of Buffy. Like others said, he's been building her up since the series. Even the small intricate things like "They come in two, with hands of blue" or whatever it is she quotes -- if anyone notices, them be the people that're chasing after River and nearly catch her in Ariel. Nearly EVERYTHING River says is relevant to something in the series.
I think after every series he creates, he spots his errors and works on them. Buffy we had Druscilla, with her bizarre rantings which he gave in similiarity to River, although her rants actually have merit behind them; most are glimpses to what's about to happen, or has happened.
I don't think he's a one trick pony. Anyway I'd type more but I'm sick as a dog and going to bed. :)

Well, of course I was generalising to a certain extent, but I was generalising over the body of work, no a couple of episodes or one series. I was talking more about the teenage martial arts expert that seems to be in everything JW does. I find the fight scenes the least interesing parts of any of his series.

I think JW's real talent lies in dialogue and humour. He has a rare (for an American. Sorry guys, but it's true.) sense of irony and his own style. I think this is especially so in Angel and Firefly (not so much in Serenity imho). I noticed that shiny as an adjective in series 3 of Angel. I'm not sure if that was the same time as he was working on FF and I never saw it on TV. I bought it on DVD without seeing any of it first except a trailer on a Buffy DVD.

www.ChAoS-ImAgErY.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE