Another Post About Whedon, This is Such a Shock

Here's what it comes down to: I'm nervous for Joss Whedon. Sounds ridiculous, right? The man's got it made. Even if you ignore every single one of his achievements other than The Avengers (which is something many ignorant latecomers to the Joss Whedon party do), the success of his Marvel enterprise is unrivaled.

But.

There comes a time in every famous man's life when the media gets overbearing. I get tweet after tweet about how many days are left until Agents of SHIELD airs, all the exclusive scenes that have been released, all the interviews with every major actor in the show, etc., etc. 

None of this hullabaloo existed when Buffy the Vampire Slayer started airing, or Angel: the Series, or Firefly. Maybe a bit more when Dollhouse first aired, and more when The Avengers was released, but even then, it was only a fraction of the media exposure now. Media exposure, that could, with a quick snap of a thumb, go from positive to negative overnight.

I'm incredibly happy that Joss Whedon is getting all the attention he deserves. Who knows? Maybe I'm just a Whedonite who doesn't like bandwagon-jumpers. But I miss the days when the world wasn't already given what seems to be half the footage of the pilot episode before it even airs. 

Agents of SHIELD premieres on Tuesday, September 24th, at 8PM on ABC. (Here's to hoping the suits at ABC are smarter than the suits at FOX!)

Give Me a Real Character, Please

I'm going to preface this post with a few facts about myself and my relationship with The West Wing. Firstly, I just finished the second season finale. Secondly, I have no knowledge of what will happen in the next five seasons. I am spoiler-free (other than knowing that John Spencer passed away while Season 7 was still filming). And thirdly, I am so in love with this show that I'd like to marry it (that last one is to soften the coming criticism).

Recurring characters. Very important, recurring characters. They keep the show running, in a sense- they bring plot arcs back, and they keep important character arcs going. If, of course, these recurring characters are well-written. When I watch a show, I know that recurring characters are well-written if I don't feel that the writers "brought them back." If I feel that they are there to tell their story, I know that these are characters. People. Unfortunately, Aaron Sorkin seems to have trouble with this.

Let's take Danny Concannon as the first example. He has no storyline at all, other than that he likes CJ and he's a White House reporter. We know nothing else about him. And then, somewhere along the beginning of Season 2, his character simply disappears. Ainsley Hayes is the second example. The entirety of her character is that she's a Republican working in a Democrat White House. Again, we know nothing else about her, and she was brought back to the show simply when Mr. Sorkin needed someone to argue with the character of Sam Seaborn. 

In comparison, let's take Charlie Bradbury, a recurring character on Supernatural. She's been on the show three times- three- and I know more about her than I know about Danny, who was in 28 episodes of The West Wing, and Ainsley, who has so far been in 8 episodes. You see, that's the difference. When I think of Charlie coming back to Supernatural in Season 9, I don't think of it as her character being brought back for x, y, or z reasons. She's being brought back because she's a character and she has a story that needs to be told. Unfortunately, on The West Wing, it feels like the writers bring a recurring character back for a simple, technical purpose and nothing else.

Don't forget the people standing on the side. Good writing is in the details, my friends. 

Teen Wolf aka Teen Writers Can Do Better Than This

I'm currently in the middle of re-watching Teen Wolf. Not because the show is so deep and complex that it requires a re-watch, but because, I'm embarrassed to say, I wasn't paying so much attention the first time around.

I am now, and I have to say that I'm somewhat disappointed. I'm enjoying the show very much- on one level it's a guilty pleasure, but on another level the characters are not only enjoyable, they also develop as people (which, to me, is the most important aspect of television writing). As much as the characters' development gets my writer's senses tingling, however, the basic plot of each episode also has to make sense.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always. 

In the third episode of Season 1, "Pack Mentality," Allison is in her room with Lydia getting ready for a double date. Lydia dismisses each article of clothing Allison presents and then picks out a sparkly black top for her. Allison's father comes into her room and tells her that she's not going out tonight because there's a curfew, given the recent attack on a bus driver. When her father leaves, Allison then sneaks out of her window in the same clothes, and Lydia opts to take the stairs. 

Now, a few things: If there's a town curfew, why hasn't it been announced in school? Why doesn't anyone seem to know about it? Later on in the bowling alley, there are plenty of people who are there bowling- did no one tell the owner of the alley that they had to close before curfew? Allison and Lydia have seemingly been trying to pick out a blouse for her for a while- but when they do pick one out, it's discarded and Allison sneaks out of the house for the date wearing her regular school clothes? Then Lydia decides to take the stairs to leave the house- wouldn't Allison's father question her? Why is she even at the Argents' house in the first place if there's a curfew?

It's in the details, Teen Wolf writers. The details.

Emmy's 2013

Jordan asked: Can you please explain to me why Sam Waterston from The Newsroom isn't up for best supporting actor in a drama series for the Emmy's?

Jordan, I'll explain it to you as soon as someone explains to me why Monica Potter and Peter Krause didn't get nominations for Parenthood. Why no one on the CW ever gets a nomination, even though there is fantastic acting on that network. Why didn't Hugh Dancy get one for Hannibal, or Jennifer Carpenter for Dexter? Happy Endings and New Girl were the funniest shows on television this year- why didn't they get nominations? I think this season was Shameless's weakest season, but Emmy Rossum rocked it. Her acting was beyond incredible- why didn't she get a nomination?

I'll tell you why.

The Emmy's is a very exclusive little club that rarely, if ever, lets anyone in. It's a cycle- the same thing every year, until a new show comes out. And when a new show does come out that they deign to put on the nominations list, it will be on the list for the next five years at least, I promise you. I don't know if it's rigged, or if they're snobs. But I will tell you that this year, I'll be boycotting. 

And when you smiled, the whole world stopped and stared for a while

This isn't my typical kind of post. I'm hesitating even as I write this, because I can already see people rolling their eyes as they read it. Crying over a "celebrity death." It's ridiculous, right? You don't even know him. You've never met him. That person he played on TV is not him. So why do you even care.

To those people, I summarily say the following: Fuck off. To the people who feel the same was as I do, I apologize for the crude language, and I grieve with you. 

Because here's the thing. He was a young man with his whole life ahead of him. He'd admitted to having a substance abuse problem since he was a young teen, and had voluntarily gotten help for it (again this year, in April). He had a family, and a girlfriend, and friends/coworkers who loved him and supported him through his struggles. He had a fan base, a huge fan base- millions of people, including myself- who looked up to him. All these people, all of us, are now stunned in grief after finding out that their idol, their son, their lover, their friend, had died, alone, in a hotel room on Saturday night. 

I hope that everyone can eventually find some measure of comfort. 

Rest in peace, Cory. 

P.S. "Look, he obviously had his own demons. I know it's hard, but try and remember that he died alone, but through Glee, he was able to show millions of people that they weren't alone. Glee is going to be remembered for quite a while as a show that promoted acceptance and tolerance despite differences, and he was instrumental in that." -Oz Shapiro

"Equality"

I've become increasingly annoyed at friends- both on Tumblr and in the real world- who say that Supernatural is a sexist or misogynist show. "All the women die" or "All the women are weak."

These two statements are gross misrepresentations of the show. Firstly: yes, not only do most of the recurring or guest female characters die, but all the men do too. What a horror. Oh, wait. Isn't the genre of this show horror? Secondly, the women are not weak. Look at Jo and Ellen Harvelle! They're only two examples of incredibly strong women on the show. Half of the females who "need to be saved" end up helping the Winchesters save themselves. So please don't tell me that the women are weak.

Besides, even if the women were weak, and even if only women were being killed off, who cares? Just because we live in a society that has progressed towards equality, and continues to do so every day, does not mean that there can no longer be books or television shows that focus on men. You don't watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer and go, "Oh my god this show! Look at all the weak men who just fall all over Buffy- it must be misandry." You don't watch Charmed and ask why there's no Charmed brother, do you? No, you accept that it's a show about women, and that just like there can be shows about women, there can also be a show about men without it being misogynist or unequal.