Meandering Musings

I lol'd @ Jeanty's comic con vid where he was hyping the end of 9 saying that the final page will have people going OMG, I have to wait until 10?!

Yeah, I figured it would have to be some weird cliffhanger because they have to come up with something to convince people to keep reading this thing because it sure as hell isn't going to be for the quality or characterization.

From:

beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com

Then again, with their history, even that will probably turn out to be a red herring.

"Wait until you see what we do with Buffy/Satsu in the next issue! ...Nothing."
"In this issue there's a huge reveal about Twilight! ...Except not."
"People will be pissed off by the end of the Tibet arc! ...Pissed off, slightly puzzled and bored, same diff."
"Buffy's having an abortion! ...No she's not."

Their entire marketing strategy seems to be "Cry wolf. Repeat. Then apologise at the end of each 'season' for not having any wolves, but promise WOLFPALOOZA next season!"

From:

Their entire marketing strategy seems to be "Cry wolf. Repeat. Then apologise at the end of each 'season' for not having any wolves, but promise WOLFPALOOZA next season!"

They're pretty much a one-trick wolf - I mean, pony - aren't they?

From:

beer-good-foamy.livejournal.com

And it's not even a very good trick... :/

From:

That's putting it kindly - too kindly.

From:

Maybe more like having Joffrey scream and cry like a psychopathic child and end up with your direwolf "Lady" being unfairly slaughtered... [/GOT reference]

From:

shapinglight

I can't see it myself. I think they would've been crap no matter what.

From:

I think I should also add the caveat to "And writers who have any idea about or actual interest in the characters... or plotting... or world building."

From:

shapinglight

In other words, what BGF said. :)

From:

sueworld2003.livejournal.com

Yes! :D I always wanted Wes, Lilah etc back. They'd work brilliantly imo.

From:

Wes/Lila were hot (and honestly, Season 5 Wes/Fred had a really 'off' vibe.)

From:

rahirah

Honestly, I don't think it's the characters in the story that are the problem. You can tell a good story about almost any set of characters. The problem with the Buffy comic has been that:

1) The pacing is terrible, and the plot had no direction for the first two-thirds of the story. They wasted a lot of time on the robot fakeout, and diddling around with a Spuffy subplot that ultimately went nowhere and signified nothing. Splitting Willow off when Willow was in fact the character advancing the main plotline was a huge mistake, structurally speaking.

2) As has been the case for the last several years, they're so concerned with concealing Buffy's feelings about Angel or Spike (or so totally uninterested in what her feelings are) that they've managed to make both relationships tedious and annoying. Shit or get off the pot, Joss.

3) The art is sub-par.

From:

You speak truth, as always. :(

From:

True. You can tell a good story with almost any set of characters, unfortunately they just don't seem interested in the ones they've got (But honestly, I miss many of the 'dead' ones like Wes, Cordy, Lilah, Fred, etc. I enjoyed some of those those more than some of the ones still around.)

Also, I truthfully cannot figure out their deal with Buffy. They don't want her to grow up, but they keep saying that the story is that she's a twenty-something growing up (while writing her like a college freshman... and I'm being generous about that. Buffy in Season 4, 5, 6, 7 was infinitely more mature than Comics Buffy). It's like they don't actually want her to have any growth or make any progress so they leave her no-win situations where she turns into a swoony 'it's my twu wuv' Bella Swan or self-pitying (and passive) Bella Swan at the drop of a hat. Plus, honestly, it's like these writers don't like her very much.

Also true that the pacing is terrible and the art is atrocious.

They're two issues from the end of "Season 9" and I cannot see what most of the issues contributed to the overall arc (seriously, what did an abortion or robot Buffy have to do with magic seeping out and Dawn dying? )

And the Ikea dreamhouse leading to working for Kennedy leading to her deciding she can't have a job because...reasons just... didn't work. Exactly what was the purpose of that? 'Just cause it 'has' to be this way? It was defeatist and depressing.

As for Spike, I tend to think that Joss (and everyone else involved) hasn't had a character arc for Spike since he died.

It's like Joss' idea was to have Spike die with Buffy saying she loved him too late for it to either be believed or for it to accomplish anything. That was "the end" in mind, but he had to bring Spike back, so everything is just wheel-spining until either Joss recreates Buffy saying it when it's too darn late to accomplish anything, or just having Spike over it all (with no story whatsoever. Right now it looks like no story, but they could always pull out the Buffy says something too late bit.) At any rate they're taking the same circuit around the plot arcs too many times and it's all feeling pointless.

Edited Date: 2013-07-23 04:22 am (UTC)

From:

quinara

Joss's problem with Spike and Buffy and everyone really is that (almost?) all of his character arcs are tragedies. People are thrust into a difficult situation; they learn something about themselves and life as they try to overcome it; ultimately they lose and everyone learns that little bit more. And it's a good way of structuring a character arc - it just gives you nowhere to go once you've reached the death at the end, whether that's real or metaphorical. I'm not sure Joss has had anything to say about Buffy as Buffy since the end of season 5, nor Spike since S7. Angel since A5, which was really the culmination of consequences following from his beige period. Wesley since he killed Lilah (everything after that was buying time). etc. etc. There's nothing he can do but reset and try and start again.

Heck, I'm trying to think if Willow has actually developed anywhere since S6 apart from become mega powerful through no work of her own... What's the Willow comic actually about, anyway?

Edited Date: 2013-07-23 08:26 am (UTC)

From:

Joss's problem with Spike and Buffy and everyone really is that (almost?) all of his character arcs are tragedies

Bravo to this post. I think there's a great deal of truth in what you say. I think you hit the nail on the head.

From:

quinara

Heh, well, I apparently forgot that Wesley didn't actually kill Lilah... But chopping off her head was basically the same diff!

From:

Also, I truthfully cannot figure out their deal with Buffy. They don't want her to grow up, but they keep saying that the story is that she's a twenty-something growing up (while writing her like a college freshman... and I'm being generous about that. Buffy in Season 4, 5, 6, 7 was infinitely more mature than Comics Buffy). It's like they don't actually want her to have any growth or make any progress so they leave her no-win situations where she turns into a swoony 'it's my twu wuv' Bella Swan or self-pitying (and passive) Bella Swan at the drop of a hat. Plus, honestly, it's like these writers don't like her very much.

NAIL, HEAD.

I thought she seemed more like a 14 or 15 year old in S8 but that could just be the artwork (esp Jeanty's - who the hell is this kinda-ugly kewpie doll and why do they keep calling her "Buffy"? *sigh*)

And the insistence on telling a story about what "ordinary 20somethings would do" (as with the party in S9.01 "20-somethings sometimes do wild and reckless things" blah blah) - that worked better on the tv show when they actually cared about the characters. Buffy is not an ordinary 20-something, esp by the end of the series.

She's not a girl anymore and she's old beyond her years - "died twice, saved the world a lot, and all I got was this lousy headstone". That doesn't necessarily mean "wise", but she's been through so many fresh hells in seven years (eight if you count her backstory) that trying to put her in the ordinary 20-somethings slot doesn't work. Nor (to me) does making her a failure and incompetent at absolutely everything she does or tries to do.

And also? Plenty of 20-somethings are very responsible and mature and focused on jobs, career, family, volunteering and activism. WHere the automatic equation of young adult = slacker, I have no idea.

what did an abortion or robot Buffy have to do with magic seeping out and Dawn dying?

Nothing - but then what did skinless Warren or Twilight/Twangel or the seed of magic and spacefrakking have to do with anything that came before? I suspect perhaps the writers get bored of their own stories, or decide, hey let's put ideas in a hat and write whatever we pull out! that's certainly how it comes across to me.

leading to her deciding she can't have a job because...reasons just... didn't work. Exactly what was the purpose of that?

Either they really think Buffy is THAT stupid and impractical, or they're unaware of their issues re: women and money. Why did Buffy ask for a paycheck for Giles in Checkpoint but NOT for herself? Esp with Dawn to raise on her own? I don't even think that occurred the writers re: the importance of economic independence as a feminist issue and the worldwide disparities between the number of women on this planet and the amount of labor we do vs the amount of wealth and property we actually call our own.

Why I'd ask the writers to even be aware of this shit is admittedly - asking a lot.

From:

norwie2010.livejournal.com

and the amount of labor we do vs the amount of wealth and property we actually call our own.

2% of the world's property belong to women (wile making up 51% of the world's population). :-(

From:

Thank for adding that! I thought it was something like 1% but I fear I was being too lazy right then *ahem* too look up the statistics. Those numbers never fail to give me pause; I'm not sure how many people are aware of them.

Additiional fact: according to the World Bank report of 2011, women made up 40% of the global labor force. I assume this does NOT include the fact that women bear the brunt of housework, childcare, and care for elders (whether they work other jobs "outside the home" or not).

On one hand the writers seem to be somewhat aware of it (they use the issue of the "feminization of poverty" ie single mothers raising children, in S6; but can't follow it all the way through. They are aware of it, but as with many things - violations of body and will in S8 & 9 - the awareness never goes all the way down to the bone.)

BTW - it's good to hear from you, I've missed your always-incisive comments! RL has kept you busy I assume. How are you?

From:

norwie2010.livejournal.com

Well, life is eating me alive (pun intended). So, not all is well in norwie-land.

OT: You are correct - the term "(global) labor force" means labor within the productive sector, not the reproductive sector (housework, childcare, etc).

So yes, the social complex of women labor and poverty is actually at the forefront of any "serious" feminism. Only equal participation in political, social and economical matters will see true equality. The economy is the groundwork of politics and social participation. (Heh! Historical materialist here. ;-))

From:

not all is well in norwie-land.

I'm very sorry to hear that! Here's a wish for better days soon.

Only equal participation in political, social and economical matters will see true equality.

Sadly we are still very far off on that. And it's not a "male vs female" issue either. I have no idea what FULL equality would actually look like, which is a very sad commentary. But full equality would mean a major shift in our hierarchies even on a micro level. And it has to happen in the home first and foremost I think.

I've wondered if how we view or value women's labor has changed since the "Industrial Revolution" ? Not that there was any golden age but I suspect there must have been some shift from a time when most families were basically agrarian (farmers) and less people "worked outside the home" because running the home/farm was the family business for most people?

From:

Seriously, they repeatedly make Buffy incompetent in practically everything, then say she's the average 20-something woman, then say it's female empowerment and... what? They're doing it wrong.

And I really would like to know exactly why they repeatedly make Buffy incapable of holding ANY job while turning around and having another Slayer admit to paying Buffy's rent FOR her. Apparently, it's not that it's impossible for a Slayer to pay rent, it's just impossible for BUFFY.

She's even managed to be regularly beaten up, necessitating that she be 'saved' by others with depressing frequency in the comics.

Again, this is writing for "a feminist icon"???

She doesn't have to be a brain surgeon, but competent in a couple of areas of her life would be nice.

From:

She doesn't have to be a brain surgeon, but competent in a couple of areas of her life would be nice.

Nail, head. Head, desk.

That is all.

From:

(as with the party in S9.01 "20-somethings sometimes do wild and reckless things" blah blah)

The fact that they consider drinking at a party in her own house "wild and reckless" says it all, no?

From:

YES. This, exactly.

From:

(seriously, what did an abortion or robot Buffy have to do with magic seeping out and Dawn dying? )

Nothing, really. The party/roofie/abortion/robot crap was nothing more than an attempt to legitimize the spacefrak. It's the same story, basically.

It's like Xander's RAGE. Apparently he was mad because he quit the supernatural stuff to keep Dawn safe, but he was yelling and punching things long before they found out Dawn was fading, so... Huh?

Spuffy, I think Joss left one of his directives when he left as he did with IDW. No bringing Cordy or Fred back and no Spuffy.

From:

You think he cared enough to leave some sort of instruction re: Spuffy? I don't.

That would take entirely too much effort (even if it's practically none). Besides, given the Bangel sycophancy of everyone involved, unnecessary and superfluous to boot.

From:

I think he cares enough to not want it to ever be explicit. Sure, if fans want to interpret this or that, fine, but an actual on-screen thing? Nope. He had his chance in Chosen and kept it in the dark, literally. He had his chance at the end of S8 and we got that studly bullshit. I really think the AR soured him to the idea of them ever being an actual couple. Innuendo, fantasies, all well and good, but as he's said more than once, they won't be Luke and Laura. It'll be like you said. Spike'll move on or they'll always be a plot device (death, whatver) to intervene.

From:

See, I just don't see the point. Having her explicitly fantasize sex with him renders it moot.

If she's explicitly fantasizing sex despite the AR, what's the substantial dif?

And, truthfully, Joss of the 'you know what Dollhouse needs? More prostitution!" And "Inara being gang raped makes Capt. Tightpants nicer..." Not to mention beating Buffy into submission glowhypnol yay!' guy is not particularly concerned about the dignity of his female characters.

I think he's stuck here because he's got a template he never intends to break: Angel will always damage any human who is close to him, Buffy will always be stuck on Angel even though it always destroys her world, Spike will make gestures she wishes that Angel would but it will never accomplish squat for him, he'll always be beneath her, and it only proves Spike is loves bitch. This is the template and it will remain so.

Edited Date: 2013-07-24 03:44 am (UTC)

From:

Oh, I don't think he's concerned about the dignity of the characters at all. He has this dynamic he seems to be obsessed with, the "almost" relationship. Sure, he can have Buffy have glow fantasies and dreams, but outwardly stating it takes down a roadblock because... then what? Then they almost have to get together because there is nothing to stop them.

It's kind of like the absolute insistence that Cordy stay dead. He has this issue that the relationship absolutely has to be stuck in that space.

From:

He has this issue that the relationship absolutely has to be stuck in that space.

This I absolutely agree with.

Now "Luke and Laura" tangent...

As someone who watched the show (off and on since childhood), in context, I'd argue that Luke = Angel, not Spike. Spike is more analogous to Laura's other love, Scott.

Luke, like Angel, eventually destroys everyone.

Luke, who does worse things than most villains, is a lauded as 'hero' for reasons that are damn near impossible to understand (because, as I said, he eventually destroys everyone who sticks by him).

Within the story, Laura was fascinated with Luke, just as Buffy was Angel.

Luke was (for reasons I never understood even though I was actually a sort of fan of the duo in the beginning) uber attractive to her. She wanted to "save" him from his shady life (but she secretly wanted the thrill of his shady lifestyle... because she was a stupid teenager).

She had someone else, who loved her more(younger, blonder, shorter Scott), but Scott somehow could never overcome her starry-eyed obsession with Luke. She dicked over Scott for Luke (despite what Luke did to her), and in some topsey, turvey way, somehow Scott (who had once been a relatively decent guy) got cast in the role of villain. I don't even rememer that he did anything particularly awful at the time that she left him for Luke, other than think Luke was an enormous asshole, saying it loudly and often, and once punching Luke in the face.

Given the generally known things re:Luke (in the mob, paid to stalk Laura, paid to shoot the governor,etc. ) One would think Luke was the 'bad guy' but, nope, HE was the "hero". Go figure. The heretofore mostly-decent (albeit quite snarky and sarcastic) law student? The villain.

Somehow Scott became --in the show-verse -- "worse" than Luke (even though by any objective measure, it's really difficult to see how. Scott -- who no doubt WAS a bad guy often over the years and who did bad things {he was an enormous douche to Lucy after Dom died} -- was still by no rational measure "worse" than Luke.

But Luke was still hero 'just cause'.

This despite...well... Luke is a selfish asshole (not that Scott isn't as well (I mentioned he was a dick to Lucy, right?), but at least Scott's transformation to asshole made sense in light of his CONSTANTLY being dicked over, while Luke -- the even GREATER asshole -- got feted as 'hero', and despite mob-connections out the whazoo became town hero and mayor, beloved by all.

Well, at least at first.

Luke did eventually lose Laura somewhere along the line (what with his refusing to give up the mob in the 90s 'cause you don't tell Luke what to do, woman!", to his just generally being a dick, to his being an even greater dick to her long, lost child by another man (not that he wasn't a dick to his own kids as well).

And, yeah, there's that thing about Luke eventually harming everyone who loves him.

Laura went bonkers so he left her lantuishing in an institution, he left his neglected daughter to be raised by Laura's mom, treated Laura's illegitimate kid like shit, and -- oh yeah -- KILLED HIS OWN GRANDSON!

Douchebag, drank and drove, running over his own four-year-old grandson then left the scene of the accident. Wasn't there for his son (whose child he had just killed), refused to go to rehab, and generally was douchebag from hell and even if his son forgave the asshole (I think. I haven't watched enough to know, but I hope Lucky rightfully hates his father) as a viewer, I sure as shit never will.

Long story short, Laura left Luke in the end.

She saned up (more ways than one) and eventually reunited with (of all people)... Scott. And say what you will about Scott and his ways (he has his douchey parts too), he does love her and, more importantly, he's never killed his own grandchild!

Edited Date: 2013-07-24 03:07 pm (UTC)

From:

Oh, I wasn't trying to say Luke=Spike or anything like that. I was just using his words to describe it. I think he did it more than one, though I don't know why.

As a tangent to your tangent, though, I do kinda think Joss does what some fans do and automatically associates characters with other ones even if they're entirely different. Bangel as boring as it was wasn't really Bella-Edward like, but that's what he compared it to and he basically turned Buffy into Bella in the comics.

From:

Oh, I wasn't trying to say Luke=Spike

Oh, I didn't think you were.

I just get amused by the BtVS/Luke and Laura thing as it is so wholly disconnected from the actual storylines involved.

Bangel as boring as it was wasn't really Bella-Edward like,

I wish Joss would spend less time mocking other franchises and more time taking care of his own. (Though, truthfully, a look around at Firefly and Dollhouse shows than many of Buffy problems are in fact Joss trope problems.)

From:

The strangest thing about it is do I not remember reading that they thought they could come back from the AR because of that storyline? I can't find the quote but I'm sure Marti or Jane or someone said it at one point.

He compared Spike/Buffy to Beatrice/Benedick and...not so much.

From:

It's a Jane quote. Not sure where. Basically, she said that when Marti *spit* proposed the AR she (Jane) and Stephen DeKnight were like "Holy hell! No, you can't do that!" Joss apparently argued that they could do that and it wouldn't screw up anything, it would be like "Luke and Laura." No probs. Jane said basically "It's not 1979 anymore." but Joss basically said not to worry.

All of which makes you give him the stink-eye when he then pops out later "We can't do Luke and Laura."

Yet more evidence of "Never listen to Joss. He just says whatever comes to mind in the moment and he could do a 180 when he has a different audience.)

Edited Date: 2013-07-25 09:52 pm (UTC)

From:

Yet more evidence of "Never listen to Joss. He just says whatever comes to mind in the moment and he could do a 180 when he has a different audience.)

Yup. I'm sure there will be another apology following S9 followed by more of the same crap writing in S10.

From:

He has this dynamic he seems to be obsessed with, the "almost" relationship.

Ever since I've watched Hell's Bells I've wondered, has this man ever been married? (I don't care or am too lazy to look it up, sadly.) Does he have any idea how much drama marriages can contain, how much sadness, rage, loss, lonliness & dysfunction? Even when a marriage is essentially a "happy" one. Marriage does NOT guarantee happily ever after, it is not an automatic sign of mental health. Buffy's parents are divorced, after all, so it's not as if he doesn't know that.

the mass cultural propaganda regarding marriage is no less fantastic than that surrounding "true love"; I'd think that the subject would be right up Joss' alley in terms of exploration.

From:

See, I just don't see the point. Having her explicitly fantasize sex with him renders it moot.

If she's explicitly fantasizing sex despite the AR, what's the substantial dif?

Yeah I really had no idea what to make of that. "Studly"? WTF? How he got from "Love him when you say you love him", from this:

To "studly"? The disconnect here is enormous. I'm definitely with Barb re: shit or get off the pot but it's exactly as you say, he never will. As long as anyone keeps reading and hoping that it (whatever "it" you prefer) will happen, as long as anyone says "I trust Joss", then he has every incentive to keep stringing readers along. And so every character is regressed and kept in stasis. And it's a particularly disappointing contrast to the series; one of the best things about it was, unlike almost every other US nighttime tv drama series I've watched, characters changed over time.

From:

Yeah I really had no idea what to make of that. "Studly"? WTF? How he got from "Love him when you say you love him",

By not actually giving a rats ass.

Sersiously, there has been absolutely ZERO follow-up (either on AtS or the comics) of that denoument. Joss has no follow-up. He just... didn't.

I think that's part of the stasis of the comics and why Season 9 Buffy turned into Season 6 "Spike you're my dark place that I confide in when everything else is shit but ewwwwwwww! I could never be your girl!" mode.

At best, Joss will repeat "Chosen" of her realizing too late for it to accomplish a damn thing.

At worst he's "Willis, what're you talkin' about...?"

From: