Sunday, April 3, 2011
Why I Hate Joss Whedon
I don't hate him, exactly, I just have a deep contempt for him. And I'm not sure why. Is it his insipid moralizing? His overly snappy dialogue? Could it be that thousands of people worship him like a god? Probably that last one. Whedon is a charismatic leader à la Hitler or Martin Luther King (not a slam on Whedon or MLK, just a simple fact, Hitler was persuasive. Charisma can be very problematic), and I find people who can manipulate others so completely, completely irritating. I feel like I'm being told what to do or feel, and I do not like either. It's similar to his pseudo-moral dilemmas. Let me make my own decisions about right and wrong, buddy. And his really witty writing isn't winning him any points with me. Humor and wit are useful devices, but Whedon overuses them. Humor is supposed to create a bond with an audience, but it only serves to create distance by sacrificing some of the emotional honesty that would normally be in many lines (anytime there's one of those pauses and you expect them to say one thing, but they snark their way out of it, or in uber-serious episodes like "The Body"). It starts out being disappointing, then frustrating, and finally you just feel contempt that you will never get close to these characters because they hide behind their snark. At least, that's how I feel when I watch anything that Joss Whedon produces, writes, directs, etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Adam, while I appreciate your strong opinion, I'd just like to offer a different perspective.
First, to address your Hitler/MLK/charisma-problem comparison: Whedon doesn't necessarily explicitly campaign for himself to attract his "following." The enormous fan base comes from several different factors. He's part of a team--he may be the leader of the team, but I think someone who creates shows/writes/directs is sort of happy with being in the background and letting the work speak for itself.
I respect your opinion that you aren't connecting with the characters or any of Whedon's projects in general. It is interesting that Ashley's post ("To Hell With This, I'm Living!") discusses how much she loves the characters. This may be stating the obvious, but so much of how we respond to TV shows is preference; one person's "overly snappy dialogue" may be another person's comedic genius. It's impossible to determine which is the "truth." But I think that's just a risk TV shows and their writers/creators take.
Also, my opinion about the "insipid moralizing" you address is tough to articulate, but I'll try: I think that every piece of art (book, TV, film, song, etc.) can have a moral, some are just more subtle--but I would argue a moral/lesson/central theme is almost always there. I think TV (and all visual media) can easily fall into a trap of seeming too obvious simply because we're literally visually confronted with a character and their emotions, and in turn, their words come to our ears, so we've got a double-dose of the message rather than being able to read a page from a book and internalize it how we choose (if that makes any sense).
I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks! :) Apologies for this being such a long comment, too.
I have to agree with Hannah.
I don't find Whedon to be ego-maniacal in any way. As a multi-hyphenate in the liberal arts he is able to communicate his perspective in a compelling and thought-provoking manner. Which is not the same thing as seeking out a public venue and calling for political/ethical change.
Also, I disagree with Whedon being overly moralistic. In fact, one of the things I like most about him is that he refuses to offer a pat moral answer to his audience. Especially in Firefly, where he could so easily have represented these characters in a black-and-white moral fashion, condemning every "wrong" thing they do.
Instead, we have three-dimensional characters who are likable even though they don't always do the "right" thing. And what is "right" is so often fluid and ill-defined.
It's a credit to Whedon's skill as a writer/etc that even the "bad" characters like Early and Jayne (sometimes) and the baddie from Serenity are intriguing and interesting and even a little likable, despite their status as "bad" guys.
One thing that I will agree with you on is the overuse of humor. It seems like he always has these corny lines at the most obvious times. In all of his shows it seems like the same lines are basically recycled.
I think it is significant to not that Whedon killed of Wash while he was having a witty moment. Symbolically to me this offered that Whedon know Whedon can be ridiculous with "too much" wit in dangerous situations. Basically he drives a large piece of metal through the idea that humor makes his characters indestructible.
Facts relating to "different perspective"
Whedon is a huge self-promoter. That is not an opinion, that is a fact.
Point A: You never see a team name or project name on anything he's ever even remotely been a part of. That's industry though, he's promoting himself. Everyone tries to do it, but that doesn't make it right (especially when all he's doing is following the Kincaid model and partially producing a painting and hiring a team of color-by-number kids to come in and actually do the work for him). The team behind him is never mentioned because 90% of the time, they're not consistent. The man runs his "team" like George Lucas runs his own.
-----------
Published proof of inflated ego (despite every TV Show, Comic book or attempted project he's ever worked on has been based on something already made by someone else or cancelled)
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/joss-whedons-advice-for-a-justice-league-movie-more-from-the-cast-of-the-avengers-20120503
See #5
Ego-confirmed. Thanks for Buffy, btw. I really feel like, at the time, I wasn't ready to outgrow Power Rangers and I really felt like I needed an under-developed highscool cheerleader with daddy issues slaying the same rubber-suit monsters summoned by Rita Repulsa to keep me going through middle school.
-------
Whenever one of Whedon's projects is cancelled, it's always everyone else's fault. Does anyone remember Alien: Resurrection? I sure as hell do. His comments? "They said the lines ... mostly ... but they said them all wrong," regarding his script for Alien 4: KY-Shitfest in Space, before going on to say, "They cast it wrong. And they designed it wrong. And they scored it wrong. They did everything wrong that they could possibly do." So according to Joss, putting Michael Wincott, Ron Perlman, Brad Dourif, J.E. Freeman and Sigourney Weaver in your ALIEN movie is horrible casting. And the director, who also directed City of Lost Children, might as well be Helen Keller.
There's that ego again.
--------
The fact is, unless this mega-douche wasn't born into an insane amount of money and born into a family that could break him into the industry kicking-and-screaming (Father: Tom Whedon, regular writer for episodes of The Golden Girls cough-cough), no one would have ever heard of Joss Whedon and he never would have been given the opportunity to write such disasters as the original Buffy The Vampire Slayer movie from the 80's (Which, again, was a terrible movie that he blamed on EVERYONE else but himself).
-------------
Joss Whedon can be explained with one simple, mathematical formula:
Uwe Boll + a lot of money = Joss Whedon
Post a Comment