Don’t say we didn’t warn you/predict this. Overrated hack* sci-fi director Joss Whedon has been kicked off Wonder Woman.
(*To be fair, we will give Joss some credit: The X-Men comics he wrote were pretty cool)
Yesterday we reported that Warner Bros has purchased a spec Wonder Woman script. While many people were reporting that it was a legal move to keep the material off the streets, we reasoned that the studio probably wasn’t happy with Whedon’s effort. And guess what, we were right. I hate to gloat, but it’s Joss Whedon, and that makes me happy.
Here are Whedon’s comments from his official blog:
SATIN TIGHTS NO LONGER. Joss will not be fighting for our rights after all.
You (hopefully) heard it here first: I’m no longer slated to make Wonder Woman. What? But how? My chest… so tight! Okay, stay calm and I’ll explain as best I can. It’s pretty complicated, so bear with me. I had a take on the film that, well, nobody liked. Hey, not that complicated.
Let me stress first that everybody at the studio and Silver Pictures were cool and professional. We just saw different movies, and at the price range this kind of movie hangs in, that’s never gonna work. Non-sympatico. It happens all the time. I don’t think any of us expected it to this time, but it did. Everybody knows how long I was taking, what a struggle that script was, and though I felt good about what I was coming up with, it was never gonna be a simple slam-dunk. I like to think it rolled around the rim a little bit, but others may have differing views.
The worst thing that can happen in this scenario is that the studio just keeps hammering out changes and the writer falls into a horrible limbo of development. These guys had the clarity and grace to skip that part. So I’m a free man.
Well, sorta. There is that “Goners” movie I can finally finish polishing, and plenty of other things in the hopper I’ve wanted to pursue. I’m as relieved as I am disappointed, and both of those things lead to drink, so that’s a plus. Truly, you may be hearing some interesting things brewing in the coming months. But all potential jets therein will be visible.
But most importantly, I never have to answer THAT question again!!!! And you don’t have to link to every rumor site! Finally and forever: I never had an actress picked out, or even a consistant front-runner. I didn’t have time to waste on casting when I was so busy air-balling on the script. (No! Rim! There was rim!) That’s the greatest relief of all. I can do interviews again!
Thanks for your time. You are the people who make the world go ’round. Or, no, science does that.
But fear not Whedon fanboys, there was no way that anyone (especially Joss) would make a good movie out of Wonder Woman. So may-be this is a good thing. Now you’ll have more time to petition Fox to make a second Serenity movie.
February 2nd, 2007 at 11:55 pm
“Now you’ll have more time to petition Fox to make a second Serenity movie.”
Of course, the anti-Whedon snark would be more convincing and/or credible if it came from someone who understood the pretty easily-known fact that Serenity wasn’t FOX, it was Universal.
February 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 pm
Oh, I forgot, Fox was the other company to dump Whedon’s project, when it was a television show. Sorry, my bad.
February 3rd, 2007 at 8:29 am
Wow, knew there had to be at least 3 people in the world who didn’t like Whedon, finally stumbled on them. Are you guys wacked? Whedon makes the world better. Except for that Angel mishap, memustadmits. But Buffy and Firefly? Fugettaboutit, he’s your new master, just bow down or bend over or whatever, but deal with it. He rocks. You know it. You like it.
February 3rd, 2007 at 12:51 pm
Wow, dude, and I do mean wow. I can understand that superpowered teenage girls who kick vampire @ss while dropping pop culture jokes isn’t your bag of rocks, but man, calling Whedon an “overrated hack” is going way overboard (into a roiling ocean of ravenous sharks who just happen to be Whedon fans).
I don’t want to use the “you’re wrong because you’re in the minority” argument, but you are (meaning that his millions of fans, including movie, TV, and culture critics) are on the right side of the Whedon question. From the first season of Buffy on, I knew I was seeing a supertalented writer-producer flex his creative talents and, with a handful of exceptions (seven seasons of Buffy, five of Angel, one of Firefly, are bound to have a few duds or misfires), the end result has been very good to stellar. If you want some suggestions for standalone Buffy episodes, just drop me a line and I’ll whip up a list for you.
As for Astonishing X-Men, I’m only part of the way with you. Very solid first arc, mediocre second arc, bounceback third arc (fourth and final arc is still in progress). He’s also taking over Runaways, a Buffy-inspired comic book series about, you guessed it, runaway superpowered teens. AND Buffy Season 8 is on its way as a comic book series. Whedon’s writing the first arc and exec-producing the series, bringing in some of Buffy’s original writers, including Jane Espenson and Brian K. Vaughan (Vaughan co-created Runaways, co-created Y-The Last Man, Ex-Machina and was just hired as a story editor on Lost).
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Saying I’m wrong because I’m in the minority is an argument that would further substantiate pop music like Britney Spears and crappy tv shows like American Idol. So I think that argument is invalid. And you’re actually proving my point. I said he was overrated. Sci-Fi/horror fanboys like to jump on a bandwaggon. It doesn’t matter what director, or the quality of content. Look at the followings of some of the worst horror directors.
I’ve tried to give the Whedon villian of the week shows a chance, but found them to be unwatchable, cheesy, and most times aimed at the lowest common denominator or teen male geeks (lesbians, girls…etc). Shows like this are why geeks are made fun of. Television shows like Lost have great writing, smart alagories, without the forementioned geek-bait.
Whedon is good at creating ideas and is pretty good with character development. But when it comes to a linear plot that doesn’t twist for twist sake, he fails (at least from what I’ve seen). Am I wrong?
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Pete, my apologies. I wasn’t clear when I brought up that argument about popularity. You’re absolutely right, popularity isn’t a sign of quality. Far from it. If it were, we’d be praising M. Night Shaymalan as one of, if not the “best” director of his generation (he’s not). More often than not, the opposite is true (yes, that makes me an elitist snob). Art house films aren’t for everyone, right? Actually they’re for a select few who can appreciate character-driven dramas and ambiguity (thus the small budgets and targeted marketing campaigns), but more often than not, they have one thing presumed blockbusters don’t have: longevity (thanks to a devoted group of film fans and critical appreciation).
Back to Whedon: I really think you need to give him a chance. You’ve probably only seen a handful of Buffy shows, out of order, correct? If so, be patient, start from the first season. It’s only 13 episodes and yes, it’s a bit rough, but Whedon, the actors, and everyone else involved were just still getting their bearings. Buffy improves considerably in seasons 2 and 3, plenty of plot twists, deep characterizations, and yes, black humor. Season 4 is almost as good as three, with some minor dropoff. Season 5 was terrific and, to be frank, Buffy should have ended right there (I don’t believe I’m alone in that assessment).
It’s funny you should mention Lost, because there’s a direct correlation between Buffy (which, by the way, started out as a cult hit with a small, appreciative audience and not, as you suggest, fanboys jumping on a bandwagon) then slowly grew fro there) and Lost. Whedon introduced (or more accurately, re-introduced) serial television. While Buffy and Angel both had plenty of standalone episodes, they also had season-long arcs (e.g., the “Big Bad”). Might not sound like much to you know, but back in the mid-90s, it was revolutionary (and dismissed as too soap opera-ish by critics at the time). Serial television allows characters to grow and change before our eyes and Whedon (and his writing staff) did just that and almost always believably (yes, there were one or two exceptions where character actions didn’t quite fit what we knew about them). For the record, I think Lost would have made a great one or two season series, since it’s all about a mystery that, if solved, ends the show (the precipitious ratings drop this season says as much).
Plus, Whedon didn’t hold back on the horror aspects, since, after all, the show was called Buffy the Vampire Slayer (well, within the bounds of television codes). Buffy (and Angel) had some genuinely creepy, scary episodes, including one, “Hush” that’s one of the best hours of genre television I’ve ever come across (yes, that means you should hunt it down and see it). It was nominated for an Emmy, I believe. Writing about it makes me want to see it again.
As for the lesbian thing: again, I think you’re being too dismissive. At the time, it was a small, but important step in accurately representing gays and lesbians on television. Whedon presented their relationship minus the prurience factor and yes that was refreshing. When the characters finally kissed, it was in the context of larger emotional changes they were going through (thus minimizing the prurience factor). He wrote both characters as complex, often flawed human beings and in the case of at least one character, put her through the emotional ringer (something he’s obviously fond of doing). The consequences that followed from that event were nothing less than devastating for the character.
Whedon’s never been afraid of tackling core life issues on his series (e.g., death). There’s one season 5 episode where a beloved character dies that, once again, is one of the best hours of television produced in the last decade. The episode charts the reactions of the other characters as they learn the news and react (often unexpectedly, but true to character). I can’t think of another time where I’ve been as moved emotionally as I was when I sat through that episode. AND it was as true to reality as any television episode I’ve come across (and sad to say, I’ve watched a lot of television in my time).
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:58 pm
You present an intelligently laid out argument.
May-be I just need to check out Firefly or something. (Buffy just doesn’t appeal to me in the slightest) I can tell you this: the trailer for Serenity reminded me of everything I hated about Whedon’s stuff. The bad puns, the badly choreographed girl kicking ass…etc. And the whole thing seemed to be a well made Star Wars knock-off. Idunno. May-be I’m wrong.
February 3rd, 2007 at 2:04 pm
You present an intelligently laid out argument. It might also be that I prefer my serials to be less episodic (ie 24).
May-be I just need to check out Firefly or something. (Buffy just doesn’t appeal to me in the slightest) I can tell you this: the trailer for Serenity reminded me of everything I hated about Whedon’s stuff. The bad puns, the badly choreographed girl kicking ass…etc. And the whole thing seemed to be a well made westernized Star Wars knock-off. Idunno. May-be I’m wrong.
February 3rd, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Well, I may not agree with you on Whedon, but I can see/understand your position. As for Serenity/Firefly, Whedon acknowledged that he was aiming to make a sci-fi/western (presumably following in Gene Roddenberry’s footsteps, who said something similar about the original incarnation of Star Trek). Whedon’s on the record as saying he used America, post-Civil War, as a model for Firefly/Serenity (rebel mercenaries with their hearts in the right place, using antiquated weapons, moving through dusty frontier towns).
I agree that some of the humor in Serenity wasn’t up to par, but then again he didn’t have pop culture references to fall back on on. As for the action choreography, Whedon had to work with a PG-13 rating, thus limiting the amount of carnage/damage he could show. I too wanted to see more, especially near the ending, when one character cuts loose on the Reavers (she’s a walking WMD). Plus, Whedon was working with a relatively tight budget ($35 million) for a sci-fi space opera, and, thus, short production schedule, so it’s understandable why some of the action scenes seemed rushed (because they were).
As for how derivative Firefly/Serenity is/was, it is and it isn’t. I think Whedon added in enough “fresh” elements to make it worth sitting through (mostly because of combination of genres, characterizations, and, of course, solid pacing/plotting). After all, Star Wars was derivative in many ways, referencing 30s sci-fi serials, WWII-style dogfights, Akira Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress, and, of course, Joseph Campbell’s Hero with a Thousand Faces (once Lucas didn’t have that template to fall back on, the series took a serious nosedive, IMO).
February 4th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Some advance warning if you decide to check out Firefly:
1) Fast forward past the execrable theme song.
2) If you speak any Chinese at all, DO NOT WATCH THIS SHOW. Trust me on that. I enjoyed the show, but every time they tried to mushmouth their way through some grammatically horrific Mandarin I wanted to slice my ears off so I never had to hear it again. Seriously, with all the money Whedon’s making you’d think he could pay a native speaker to proof that shit.
February 7th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
Whedon’s alright. He honestly cares about, and interacts with, his fanbase. He supports the worthy cause of having more strong famale characters in media. He’s funny and intelligent and loves the genre in which he works.
I don’t like every single thing the man has done. Buffy, for me, is hit-or-miss… and I’ve done the whole series in order (and was a fan of the somewhat B-grade original movie). Angel didn’t grab me. I’d seen the same premise before in Dark Shadows, Forever Knight, and a handful of other vampire-fighting-evil television shows. I wouldn’t, however, call him a ‘overrated hack.’ I think he’s an intelligent writer.
Firefly, regardless of the poor chinese, was something I really enjoyed. I had trouble adjusting to the world of the show, at first, but after a few episodes I found I really enjoyed it. I enjoyed the character interraction… almost more than the action sequences. I liked the movie Serenity, too, though I missed some of the humor, and the musical scoring, of the series (though the score for the film had some very compelling moments).
I think you aught to give Firefly a chance. It isn’t high art. But it’s a fun and ‘realistic’ view of a future in space. After years of failed Rick Berman Star Treks and Lucasfilm’s “We care more about visuals than characters” attitude, this show made it fun to be in space again. And hey… in Firefly THERE’S NO SOUND EFFECTS IN THE VACUUM OF SPACE. That’s a coup for most sci-fi.
Incidentally, Firefly/Serenity doesn’t really have the pop culture references you abhor. I also don’t remember any ‘puns’ per se. The humor of Firefly/Serenity tends to be more observational and ironic/sarcastic. I liked the writing of Firefly much more than Buffy or Angel.
The Firefly theme song was disarming and annoying to me at first but has grown on me over time. The lyrics give the listener the main character’s inner monologue. It is a bit odd to listen to. Good use of (what sounds like) scrap metal for percussion.
If you can’t stomach the 14 episodes of Firefly, but are into scripts, check out the episode “Objects in Space.” Not much action, but fun writing.
As far as Wonder Woman goes, I never really got the impression it was going to happen. Whedon tends to write very introspectively. I’m sure Whedon had an interesting take on the character, but it probably was more introspective than most superhero flicks tend to be.
Peace,
Seth Asa
April 27th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Serenity is undoubtedly one of the worst films in the history of cinema, easily worse than Battlefield Earth and far surpassed by any Ed Wood vehicle. Whedon, borrowing from Alien Resurrection and Buffy, presents a mind numbingly tedious and puerile movie experience. Exerable dialogue and made-for-tv direction combine with a meandering and cliched yet reactionary storyline and 1 dimensional characterisation. It astonishes me that Serenity was given a favourable reception by any critic, but this merely confirms a worrying decline in standards, especially in science fiction.