The Avengers Joss Whedon leading on "Avengers" short list of directors

[Spider-Fan]

Whedon's Buffy dialogue may seem childish cause the show was about...TEENAGERS! Firefly's dialogue wasn't childish like that. Nor Serenity. Nor Dr. Horrible. The dialogue in those was much more mature and witty. Plus, Iron Man is a film, Buffy a TV show. TV shows don't have the same plotting style as films, so comparing the interaction in Buffy vs Iron Man is flawed. Iron Man had the basic 3 act model of film, and Buffy the basic episodic plotting of TV. In episodic plotting, plot lines carry over and need to continue over long periods of time, so they need stretch out. Films are much tighter dialogue wise due to the confined time. Big difference.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

No Favs was a clean slate. Apart from Zathura he didn't do action. I thought the action in IM was great (apart from the mediocre final fight)

But that's the thing... I HAVE seen Whedons action. And i don't like it.

And choreography and shot composition and all that? Yea he isn't directly in charge of them, he doesn't stage them... but he has the final say, he shoots them. And i don't like it. Looks made for TV and in his actual TV shows it reminds me of Power Rangers.

 

[Saint]

OK fair enough. But my statement still stands and no one has come close to rebuffing it.

Sure, there's nothing incorrect about what you said, but that's not entirely meaningful. Other directors lacking action experience have gone on to direct great action sequences in their superhero films

Thats fair enough. But i ain't one of those people so...

You're not? I can retrieve the specific quotes where you made the flawed complaints I cited, if you like.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

yes, that is extremely annoying, but you're generalizing posters and placing them into camps. there are annoying posters who can't qualify a stance on every side of this discussion.

to you specifically, how is repeating "i don't think he's right for this!" any less annoying than "he's perfect for this!" ?

I'm not just going "He's not right for this!" though. I'm giving my reasons.

Earlier today and yesterday people were taking my opinions, my reasons, and belittling them, because they disagreed. That's why i got pissed off.

Hopefully you have noticed i'm not belittling your sides opinions, i'm strongly disagree yea, but not outright going "No... you're wrong".

 

[lixdexia]

No Favs was a clean slate. Apart from Zathura he didn't do action. I thought the action in IM was great (apart from the mediocre final fight)

that's exactly my point

But that's the thing... I HAVE seen Whedons action. And i don't like it.

And choreography and shot composition and all that? Yea he isn't directly in charge of them, he doesn't stage them... but he has the final say, he shoots them. And i don't like it. Looks made for TV and in his actual TV shows it reminds me of Power Rangers.

so your comment is that his made for tv action looked made for tv? no ****ing kidding!? he working on a budget and couldn't afford the same choreographers you'll see on the avengers. it's apples to oranges.
[YT]xwVqW6J4FRc[/YT] this would be a more accurate portrayl of what to expect. but even this was made on a shoe string compared to the resources he'll have available for the avengers

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Whedon's Buffy dialogue may seem childish cause the show was about...TEENAGERS! Firefly's dialogue wasn't childish like that. Nor Serenity. Nor Dr. Horrible. The dialogue in those was much more mature and witty. Plus, Iron Man is a film, Buffy a TV show. TV shows don't have the same plotting style as films, so comparing the interaction in Buffy vs Iron Man is flawed. Iron Man had the basic 3 act model of film, and Buffy the basic episodic plotting of TV. In episodic plotting, plot lines carry over and need to continue over long periods of time, so they need stretch out. Films are much tighter dialogue wise due to the confined time. Big difference.

Look SF, you are doing the thing that annoys me and that annoys me more, because you're a cool guy, so don't do it.

I HAVE ****ing seen Serenity. I'm not comparing Iron Man to Buffy. I'm comparing Iron Man to the entire body of work i have seen of Whedons.

Iron Man is less forced, wittier in a more grown up way, slicker and just all round more entertaining than anything Whedon has ever done... INCLUDING Serenity IMO.

Sure, there's nothing incorrect about what you said, but that's not entirely meaningful. Other directors lacking action experience have gone on to direct great action sequences in their superhero films

He doesn't lack action experience though. He's not like Favs who had basically **** all under his belt. He isn't a clean slate like Favs. I've seen what Whedons action is... and i don't like it.

And giving him a big budget doesn't automatically mean he will make it better.

You're not? I can retrieve the specific quotes where you made the flawed complaints I cited, if you like.

Oi you! Don't change it while i'm replying!

What the things about Wasp saving the day and all that? lol like i said before, that was in jest.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

that's exactly my point

so your comment is that his made for tv action looked made for tv? no ****ing kidding!? he working on a budget and couldn't afford the same choreographers you'll see on the avengers. it's apples to oranges.
[YT]xwVqW6J4FRc[/YT] this would be a more accurate portrayl of what to expect. but even this was made on a shoe string compared to the resources he'll have available for the avengers

I was including Serenity in that. And having a bigger budget doesn't mean his action will be better.

In fact handling a bigger budget brings a whole new host of problems to overcome. Throwing money at something doesn't necessarily make it easier. Someone of your intelligence knows this.

Plus... Avengers don't go round engaging in shootouts and hand to hand combat.

Apart from Cap.

 

[lixdexia]

I'm not just going "He's not right for this!" though. I'm giving my reasons.

...your incredibly general, based solely on personal opinion. reasons.

Earlier today and yesterday people were taking my opinions, my reasons, and belittling them, because they disagreed. That's why i got pissed off.

that's understandable, but it's the hype...you were surprised by this?

Hopefully you have noticed i'm not belittling your sides opinions, i'm strongly disagree yea, but not outright going "No... you're wrong".

you're not? i am misreading you then, because though you may not have used those exact words, this is the exact implication i derive from your posts.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Look SF, you are doing the thing that annoys me and that annoys me more, because you're a cool guy, so don't do it.

That teenager part I put in there was kind of needless, so I apologize for that. The rest of the post isn't meant to be condescending, though. I'm just comparing TV vs Film.

I HAVE ****ing seen Serenity. I'm not comparing Iron Man to Buffy. I'm comparing Iron Man to the entire body of work i have seen of Whedons.

Iron Man is less forced, wittier in a more grown up way, slicker and just all round more entertaining than anything Whedon has ever done... INCLUDING Serenity IMO.

I'm not saying you must like Serenity, I just disagree that Serenity had immature dialogue. Buffy I'll give you definitely does, but it was a TV show for teens, so I can see why it turned out like that. I don't feel Serenity made those same mistakes. You didn't like Serenity, and I'm not saying you must. I'm just saying it was more mature IMO.

Iron Man is witty and has great dialogue flow. I'm in complete agreement here. But, Whedon's body of work is mostly stuff of his own design. He has done little work outside X-Men comics in adapting another source that made the screen. I don't think it is fair to write him off of Avengers for dialgoue in franchises of his own design because I don't think he is going to write the Avengers characters in uncharacteristic manners. This time, he has a source and other films to establish a basis, which I think will aid him in crafting Avengers.

 

[lixdexia]

I was including Serenity in that. And having a bigger budget doesn't mean his action will be better.

no it doesn't, but a 99% chance of rain doesn't exactly means it's going to rain either

In fact handling a bigger budget brings a whole new host of problems to overcome. Throwing money at something doesn't necessarily make it easier. Someone of your intelligence knows this.

this i agree with. that is the one big hurdle here i see as untested for whedon, and i'm looking forward to seeing the results.

Plus... Avengers don't go round engaging in shootouts and hand to hand combat.

Apart from Cap.

this is somewhat true (thors signature is a melee weapon...he does it all the time. it's not exactly foreign territory for ironman either), and since whedon hasn't done anything resembling what i or what i assume you imagine a proper avengers action sequence to look like we either go with that or we are forced to say that there is no acceptable evidence for either argument.

 

[lixdexia]

That teenager part I put in there was kind of needless, so I apologize for that. The rest of the post isn't meant to be condescending, though. I'm just comparing TV vs Film.

...

see this? see how much more clearly we present our views when we're not lambasting one another with generalities? don't just make you want to sing kumbiah and roast marshmellows

 

[Saint]

He doesn't lack action experience though.

You said that Whedon has done nothing indicating he can direct Avengers-style action. That is a lack of experience with Avengers-style action.

Consider it this way: you said that the clip of River fighting doesn't mean he can direct the action in Avengers, because the action in Avengers won't be like that, right? The reverse should also be true, then: your distaste for the action in Serenity doesn't mean you won't like his action in Avengers, as the action in Avengers won't be like that.

And giving him a big budget doesn't automatically mean he will make it better.

Not absolutely, but there is certainly an argument to that effect. Whedon's shows were made for TV (and definitely not with the kind of budget you see on 24), with actors who were not physically adept and stuntpeople who didn't really look like the actors they were standing in for--and that affects the action significantly. If you watch Buffy, you'll see that the action is clearly shot in such a way to hide the features of a stuntwoman who is taller, older, and shaped quite differently from Gellar. This becomes considerably less apparent later in the series as Gellar started doing more of the work herself, but then you're still dealing with an actress who really isn't qualified to be doing the sort of action the show called for. Furthermore, Whedon did not direct mosts episodes of those shows.

Serenity, obviously, is a different case.

What the things about Wasp saving the day and all that? lol like i said before, that was in jest.

If you say so.

 

[roach]

based solely on personal opinion. reasons.

But isnt this what we all are doing....if you didnt like Buffy, Firefly or his run on AXM what would your opinon of this news be?

 

[topdog1]

I was including Serenity in that. And having a bigger budget doesn't mean his action will be better.

In fact handling a bigger budget brings a whole new host of problems to overcome. Throwing money at something doesn't necessarily make it easier. Someone of your intelligence knows this.

Plus... Avengers don't go round engaging in shootouts and hand to hand combat.

Apart from Cap.

Does it really matter? The action in Serenity tops anything Chris Nolan has shot for two Batman films and I don't see anyone whining about those films. Hell, the action in Batman Begins was choppy and downright awful. I remember many people pointing out that Nolan simply doesn't know how to film a fight scene. I fired back that he was simply covering for the fact that Bale or his double couldn't actually move in the batsuit. Then, there's Bryan Singer's X-Men films. Again, great stories but poor action. The Nightcrawler White House attack is superb but every fight in X1 wasn't done well and the Wolverine/Deathstrike fight was far too short. That said, I think X2 and TDK are two of the best films ever created.

Whedon already has a leg up in my book.

 

[Saint]

also could we not hear that Whedon is "perfect for this because he knows how to direct ensembles" that gets annoying to.

and bringing up favorite episodes of "Buffy" and "Firefly" to show that he can direct action.


t:

What's that? You want more episode suggestions? Happy to oblige! "The Body" from Buffy for drama, and "Not Fade Away" from Angel for action and superheroics; both episodes Whedon directed himself.

 

[roach]

how is it a leg up if he cant shoot action like Nolan or Singer which both directors corrected in their followups

 

[roach]

What's that? You want more episode suggestions? Happy to oblige! "The Body" from Buffy for drama, and "Not Fade Away" from Angel for action and superheroics; both episodes Whedon directed himself.

Honestly do you think I am gonna do look these episodes up?

 

[lixdexia]

But isnt this what we all are doing....if you didnt like Buffy, Firefly or his run on AXM what would your opinon of this news be?

nit pic, reasons was meant to be after general in that sentence, sorry i do that sometimes...large clumsy hands occasionally hit the arrow keys by accident.

and to an extent, yes that is what we are all doing. many of us are also masqurading these opinions as fact (i am not exempt from this.)

as to my opinion if i didn't like buffy? i'd have to look at another creator in a similar situation and compare. as filmchick said, the jj abrams compariosns work well.

if i didn't like astonishing x-men? if you're refering to the breakworld and sword stuff...i didn't. if you're referring to the interaction between the characters, especially the x-men themselves, or the weight and staging of the action...i can't even wrap my ahead around what it would be to not like that. it's masterwork in my opinion. take for instance the 2 page fastball special splash...just that existing fills me with assurance that not only will we get an "avengers assemble!" piece, but it will flat work.

 

[topdog1]

how is it a leg up if he cant shoot action like Nolan or Singer which both directors corrected in their followups

I'm saying that Serenity already topped both of their follow ups in terms of action.

 

[lixdexia]

Does it really matter? The action in Serenity tops anything Chris Nolan has shot for two Batman films and I don't see anyone whining about those films. Hell, the action in Batman Begins was choppy and downright awful. I remember many people pointing out that Nolan simply doesn't know how to film a fight scene. I fired back that he was simply covering for the fact that Bale or his double couldn't actually move in the batsuit.

quick tangent: yes he was covering for the batsuit but i don't think that was his primary reason for filming the fights the way he did. i feel he did this to make the fights feel chaotic and clostrophobic. i don't know how many of you have ever been in a real brawl, but they ain't done in arial shots.

 

[roach]

I saw nothing in Serenity that topped Nightcrawler vs the Secret Service or Wolverine at the school

 

[lixdexia]

Honestly do you think I am gonna do look these episodes up?

no, but you should. the body is one of the finest hours ever shown on televisiont:

 

[Saint]

Honestly do you think I am gonna do look these episodes up?

No chance, but I thought I'd give you the opportunity anyway. If you watch them and you like them, then your confidence in the direction of the film would increase--and that's good, right? If not, you can come back and tell me you still don't like Whedon, and you'll be no worse off than you are now. In fact, it might help you legitimize your position. Really, I don't know why you wouldn't want to evaluate the man's work, if you're going to be discussing this film. You can only benefit.

Though, I should specify that Serenity is a better example of Whedon's action than "Not Fade Away," as the latter was obviously made for TV.

no, but you should. the body is one of the finest hours ever shown on televisiont:

You're really taking the wind out of the sails of our blood feud when you say stuff that's in complete agreement with me.

 

[roach]

I've seen serenity and didnt like it

tell you what i will look at the episode in the name of Internet Relations and let you know what I thought

 

[JP]

At the end of the day Whedon is the director. He's the guy Marvel wanted. Heck, I'm sure even Favs got a say in it. It's a done deal. The end. What's the point of arguing for or against him?