HBO Sci-Fi Series ‘’The Nevers’’

[henzINNIT]

The first suspicious Whedon 'resignation' I recall was Batgirl. Stepping down because he couldn't crack the story always seemed like nonsense.

He was definitely given the opportunity to leave this show quietly and with dignity, which is grim. The truth would harm the money. I'm not sure it matters anymore. This show is screwed. I thought marketing had a struggle before, selling a Whedon show without mentioning his name. It's much worse now of course. I'm not sure I can watch it at all.

 

[Snow Queen]

The first suspicious Whedon 'resignation' I recall was Batwoman. Stepping down because he couldn't crack the story always seemed like nonsense.

Batgirl. I already have that CW show hurting me, I didn't need a Joss Whedon movie to do it too.

 

[Primal Slayer]

The first suspicious Whedon 'resignation' I recall was Batwoman. Stepping down because he couldn't crack the story always seemed like nonsense.

He was definitely given the opportunity to leave this show quietly and with dignity, which is grim. The truth would harm the money. I'm not sure it matters anymore. This show is screwed. I thought marketing had a struggle before, selling a Whedon show without mentioning his name. It's much worse now of course. I'm not sure I can watch it at all.

The general audience wont have any idea this is Joss or who he even is.

 

[henzINNIT]

Batgirl. I already have that CW show hurting me, I didn't need a Joss Whedon movie to do it too.

My mistake. I don't know the Bat family well. Funny how times change. Back when Whedon was struggling to get Wonder Woman off the ground, he seemed like the perfect choice to me. By the time Batgirl fell apart, I felt we might have dodged a bullet.

I love Buffy. I don't think that is going to change, I think it stands up as art and as a product of a lot of people's effort; but there is certainly going to be a lot of re-evaluations, and it will probably never be the same again for me. And that sucks. Not because I am particularly invested in Whedon (though I very much was at one time), but because his toxic behaviour completely undermines the show's core identity of empowering women.

The general audience wont have any idea this is Joss or who he even is.

This is true enough. There are people who will remain oblivious to this all. 'The Nevers' can basically kiss their online presence goodbye though. Absolutely everything that isn't HBO's own words will mention Whedon. If not in the text it'll be all over the comments.

 

[#root]

I think the key thing to take away is that the WB investigation was more thorough than I thought. And likely, Whedon got fired.

Poor Charisma. I was recently rewatching Buffy and it really shocked me how badly the show treated her even early on. I knew about how Whedon reacted to her pregnancy and the ****show that followed that but looking back, it’s kind of obvious he never had any respect for Cordelia or Charisma. And Charisma still shined. She was one of the most immediately memorable and likeable actors on the show alongside SMG. She really deserves a comeback.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

My dear Eleanor. Looks fun. I can see a lot of the influences, which is funny. Especially Barret's gun arm.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Publicity tour is starting and the Whedon question came up. Of course their experience was nothing but positive with him but little to late for a turn around.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Whedon notwithstanding, this show looks awesome. I hadn’t even heard of it until the trailer came on when I was trying to watch a YouTube video on something else and at first I thought it was an ad for that Assassin’s Creed series coming to Netflix lol. But it looks great and I loved Laura Donnelly on Outlander. Also, James Norton continues to defy expectations and take on oddball characters, which is cool. He definitely has the look of a classic, heartthrob leading man but he steers clear of that quite frequently for more interesting roles.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

 

[Primal Slayer]

Hollywood Reporter basically ripped it shreds. The Gifted but on a higher budget, incoherent plot, way to many characters.

 

[flickchick85]

Meanwhile the LA Times freakin' loved it, lol. Sounds like it's very, VERY Whedon, so one's opinion will stem largely from how they feel about his style/tropes.

 

[Fincher]

Hollywood Reporter basically ripped it shreds. The Gifted but on a higher budget, incoherent plot, way to many characters.

Well, I loved The Gifted, so that sounds good to me.

 

[Dr.]

I notice that some reviews (not all) devote a fair bit of attention to Whedon’s BTS troubles and tribulations — and they note, with a tinge of schadenfreude, that his name has been scrubbed from promo materials. So one gets the impression that these reviews are less about the actual work under consideration and more a critique of cultural issues like Me Too, bullying, damaged professional reputations, etc.

(Analogously, several reviews of ZSJL seemed more interested in talking about “toxic fandom” on social media. The implication being that the negativity which may surround the art will necessarily contaminate the art, itself.)

Among the general population of movie/TV consumers, I wonder how many are actually interested in the various Twitter gossip and BTS shenanigans. Or do most folks just care about the on-screen product? And, therefore, do most folks want reviews that confine their evaluations to the on-screen product?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I notice that some reviews (not all) devote a fair bit of attention to Whedon’s BTS troubles and tribulations — and they note, with a tinge of schadenfreude, that his name has been scrubbed from promo materials. So one gets the impression that these reviews are less about the actual work under consideration and more a critique of cultural issues like Me Too, bullying, damaged professional reputations, etc.

(Analogously, several reviews of ZSJL seemed more interested in talking about “toxic fandom” on social media. The implication being that the negativity which may surround the art will necessarily contaminate the art, itself.)

Among the general population of movie/TV consumers, I wonder how many are actually interested in the various Twitter gossip and BTS shenanigans. Or do most folks just care about the on-screen product? And, therefore, do most folks want reviews that confine their evaluate to the on-screen product?

Abuse. To women, people of color and even a child. That is what Joss Whedon is accused of and considering the amount of confirmation, did. To boil it down to gossip and BTS shenanigans does a disservice to those that had to live through it.

As to the reviews, nothing comes out in a vacuum. Read them, disregard them, do as you like. But Joss Whedon wasn't fired from this show and scrubbed from it's existence in another dimension. It was this one. Oh, and I'd never seen anyone questioned "schadenfreude" at the expense of an abuser. So that's new.

 

[Dr.]

Abuse. To women, people of color and even a child. That is what Joss Whedon is accused of and considering the amount of confirmation, did. To boil it down to gossip and BTS shenanigans does a disservice to those that had to live through it.

Well… at the end of my post, I framed a more general question to do with evaluating any work/text (ostensibly, the critic’s principal task) vs. commentary on matters that exist outside of the text. You took the language I used there and applied it to the specific case of Whedon and The Nevers — which I had consigned to a separate paragraph. For a reason. I’m no Whedon apologist.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Well… at the end of my post, I framed a more general question to do with evaluating any work/text (ostensibly, the critic’s principal task) vs. commentary on matters that exist outside of the text. You took the language I used there and applied it to the specific case of Whedon and The Nevers — which I had consigned to a separate paragraph. For a reason. I’m no Whedon apologist.

You started out your post talking about the "troubles and tribulations" of Whedon and focusing on what you perceive to be schadenfreude when it comes to the BTS troubles in relation to the reviews of the Nevers. You repeat this thought process in the second paragraph while bringing up the Snyder Cut.

In your final paragraph you do not leave this line of thinking, and by the very structure of your post, are including the "twitter gossip" and "BTS shenanigans" of the above two examples when questioning whether people cared about that stuff while looking at the reviews. How are you not including it all under the same umbrella in the same post, that never separates them as ideas or concepts?

 

[Snow Queen]

I notice that some reviews (not all) devote a fair bit of attention to Whedon’s BTS troubles and tribulations — and they note, with a tinge of schadenfreude, that his name has been scrubbed from promo materials. So one gets the impression that these reviews are less about the actual work under consideration and more a critique of cultural issues like Me Too, bullying, damaged professional reputations, etc.

(Analogously, several reviews of ZSJL seemed more interested in talking about “toxic fandom” on social media. The implication being that the negativity which may surround the art will necessarily contaminate the art, itself.)

Among the general population of movie/TV consumers, I wonder how many are actually interested in the various Twitter gossip and BTS shenanigans. Or do most folks just care about the on-screen product? And, therefore, do most folks want reviews that confine their evaluations to the on-screen product?

And if that were so, what is the problem with deriving pleasure from an abusive ******* not being in a role where he can continue abusing people while reaping praise?

 

[Dr.]

And if that were so, what is the problem with deriving pleasure from an abusive ******* not being in a role where he can continue abusing people while reaping praise?

There is no problem. You and I can take special delight in Whedon’s downfall as much as we like. Indeed, inasmuch as this is the mainstream consensus, we risk little by reiterating it. But from a professional critic, taking this approach strikes me as a lazy and somewhat useless form of analysis.

Which brings me back to my original question (which, BTW, I posed sincerely — not rhetorically): do most viewers know about behind-the-scenes stuff? Do they care to know about behind-the-scenes stuff? Or do most confine their attention to what’s on screen? If so, then a review that veers into those “extra-textual” details isn’t providing relevant consumer advice.

 

[Dr.]

List of season 1 episodes:

1. “Touched" D: Joss Whedon; W: Joss Whedon -- April 11, 2021
2. "Exposure" D: Joss Whedon; W: Jane Espenson -- April 18, 2021
3. "Ignition" D: David Semel; W: Kevin Lau -- April 25, 2021
4. "Undertaking" D: David Semel; W: Madhuri Shekar -- May 2, 2021
5. "Hanged" D: Joss Whedon; W: Melissa Iqbal -- May 9, 2021
6. "True" D: Zetna Fuentes; W: Jane Espenson -- May 16, 2021

The remain four episodes of S1 (not sure they're even in production yet) are TBA.

 

[Fincher]

I was wondering if there'd be more than that. Ten sounds preferable to six to me.

 

[Primal Slayer]

Its so weird to split a season in half and not film the remainder. If its a hit then you have a long hiatus for 4 episodes to be produced.

 

[Mysteryman]

Poor Charisma. I was recently rewatching Buffy and it really shocked me how badly the show treated her even early on. I knew about how Whedon reacted to her pregnancy and the ****show that followed that but looking back, it’s kind of obvious he never had any respect for Cordelia or Charisma. And Charisma still shined. She was one of the most immediately memorable and likeable actors on the show alongside SMG. She really deserves a comeback.

Brave Charisma.

 

[Fincher]

Yeah, I'm not sure what that is. Network shows often have back orders, but they have longer seasons when that happens.

I liked the first episode. I was thoroughly engaged by what was happening, and the large number of characters didn't bother me at all because it meant different people/factions with different angles. If I'd point to one thing that was an issue, it's that I wish I could have rewound (or better yet that there were subtitles) because I often had trouble understanding the dialogue with the accents. The cop and the guy in the mine were particularly difficult. I think I understand what was basically happening in that scene (there were a couple parts that might have been important that I couldn't understand), but that was by extrapolating from the bits I could make out. I might end up rewatching it this week (possibly every week) to see if I can catch more.

 

[Sithborg]

I would have liked some more time with Mrs. True and Ms. Adair, but that was about my only complaint about the pilot. Nick Frost is great.

The reveal at the end kind of caught me by surprise. An interesting twist on the setting.

 

[Incarnadine]

Brave Charisma.

Yes she is. After the attack she survived when she was 22 from a serial rapist police officer that she was largely responsible for taking down (he got 56 years) she shouldn't have had to deal with bullying or bad treatment during the Buffy/Angel years.

As for The Nevers, I quite liked the pilot. It certainly wasn't boring.