elisi | Vaguely related to the comics.

Joss likes teh evilness! *C*

Well yes - but I suspect that he genuinely thinks Angel is a good guy. Which... Well. He tries, but he fails - constantly, continually, and he never really learns. Don't get me wrong, I love him (Angel) to pieces, but I'd never call him a decent... Like once told Buffy, it's not the demon in him that needs killing, it's the man.

And I don't think Joss gets that, which is beyond weird.

Yes, kinda weird if he thinks that Angel isn't *bad*, when, in the show, he constantly points out that Angelus is just a part of him and that he had to deal with all his flaws. WEIRD.
In a way, I think that for Joss was really hard to portray Angel, but just because the soul-boy was simply a romantic hero in first seasons of Buffy. I mean, maybe it's that?

I think you're right - of course many of us think that he finally became interesting when he got his own show, but as far as I know Joss always found him problematic. Can we call it 'Twilight' syndrome? The hero is clearly a deeply flawed character, but the creator can't see past the sparkles... ;)

LOL.
I think that Angel became interesting when he started to be the existentialist guy. And, maybe, Joss is a hopeless romantic, who actually loved Buffy/Angel's relationship to death, so he maked this guy more interesting for his girl. (?) I don't know!
In the latest interview with Katie Lucas, Joss said that he was more interested in Spike. For him, Angel was like Lestat (the classic vampire/byronic hero, I think) and Spike was more complex. I believe that it's really difficult when a character you don't actually like is the audience's favourite. He worked a lot to make Angel more like *his* characters and, maybe, now he sees him good.

It's also man!pain affliction... Much like the Tenth Doctor became very unlikeable, utterly swallowed up by his own pain, but still everyone loved him 'just because'. His pain supposedly excuses the way he's a jerk to everyone around him. (I rewatched some of S3 and OMG Ten was such a bastard towards Martha. It's *breathtaking*.)

For him, Angel was like Lestat (the classic vampire/byronic hero, I think)
Which is where the problem lies, because Angel isn't. As you say, he was far more interesting when he was the existentialist guy.

Which is where the problem lies, because Angel isn't. As you say, he was far more interesting when he was the existentialist guy.
But I became gradually that guy.
In the first seasons of Buffy he was so self-absorbed! Man-pain affliction, truly!

No one has ever suffered like he has suffered! POOR POOR ANGEL!

I'm gonna write a post about that! XDD

Ooooh, sounds good. :D

(Like I said the other day in a response to Mark - Ten and Jack and Angel could have an angst-off. Like the Four Yorkshiremen. *g*)

Oh god, i remember when I was a teenager and thinking that his line about what it felt like to have done the things he'd done and to care, was oh so deep. And then I grew up and realized just how utterly self-centered that lines really is.

And then I grew up and realized just how utterly self-centered that lines really is.
Well, it's tragic, of course. But it shouldn't stop there. When Angel is at his best, all that guilt is what motivates him to act and help others. When he gets absorbed in himself everything just spirals out of control. All of which reminds me of this fabulous quote by Matt Smith:

"That's what interests me about The Doctor because, actually, look at the blood on the man's hands... Which is why I think he has to make silly jokes and wear a fez. Because if he didn't, he'd hang himself."

I wrote something and, of course, I forgot 80% of what was about to saying. I'm better in open discussion then in meta.
Ooohh, Matt Smith! I love him, he made me fall in love with the Doctor!

I wrote something and, of course, I forgot 80% of what was about to sayin
Ah yes, that's quite normal! :)

And Matt Smith is just amazing! <3 <3 <3

This comment is so accurate I cannot process it. You have basically summed up all of my thoughts on Angel in one comment.

You're welcome! *beams*

(No really - take it home, feed it, do whatever. It's all yours!)

He actually thinks Angel is a "decent, handsome, stalwart hero"? Did he watch the shows, listen to the dialogue, analyze his actions?

Well I don't know! My first instinct was to presume that it was ironic & tongue in cheek, but looking at the comics... It could be straight. Which... yeah. I dunno. *shakes head*

ETA: OK, he's handsome. No arguing with that. *g*

Edited 2012-04-14 12:11 (UTC)

Uhm, I'd say that depends on your personal taste. I've got to say that I've never found Angel attractive. But then i have the same problem with Nathan Fillion,whom Joss thinks is oh so attractive, and who looks pretty bland to my pov.

I was waiting for someone to disagree! :D

(Warning: meta fueled by lack of caffeine)

I have always thought that David Greenwalt had a better grasp on Angel's character than Joss. In his episodes (of AtS), Angel was often the bastard that I love so much. When Joss wrote him, he seemed to get lost in the angsting. Joss finally seemed to get this in season 5, which is when Angel finally said F@#$ it, and decided to be himself and stop trying to be a good guy. Sure he wanted to save the world, but he realized people were going to get hurt in the process and that he didn't really care (unless it was someone he cared about).

That is something I have noticed about Joss in general, he doesn't seem as comfortable writing the morally ambiguous sides of his characters. He realizes they are there, but he isn't quite comfortable going there (Spin the Bottle is an example, since he stripped all the glorious layers away from Wes and took him back to the idiot we first met on BtVS). He seems much happier when he is dealing with achetypal characters rather than flawed human beings.

Oh and speaking of Angel and Jack getting in an angst off, I don't know if you ever saw this little ficlet but even though the bunny faded and it was jossed all to heck by After the Fall and CoE, I still think it fits them both.

I believe that Angel belongs more to Greenwalt then to Whedon. Or, better, I think that Angel is loved and understood completly by Greenwalt.
About flawed human beings ... I have to write also about it!

Ya, writing! :D

(Warning: meta fueled by lack of caffeine)
Well it's pretty good! :D

I have always thought that David Greenwalt had a better grasp on Angel's character than Joss.
I agree very much.

He seems much happier when he is dealing with achetypal characters rather than flawed human beings.
It's easier to write...

Oh and speaking of Angel and Jack getting in an angst off, I don't know if you ever saw this little ficlet but even though the bunny faded and it was jossed all to heck by After the Fall and CoE, I still think it fits them both.
If I did then I never commented (bad me)! 'Tis a very apt look into the characters, and exactly why Jack will always end up OK in the end. Thanks for linking.

Well it's pretty good! :D
Thanks.

It's easier to write...
See, I think that it is harder to write archetypes because they can so easily become boring easily unless they are done right. Sometime when I can take the time to research and find examples I am going to write a meta about how I think the most human and rounded characters on both AtS and BtVS were actually the Fanged Four. They always struck me as the most flawed and least archetypal (or at least if they began as an archetype the time to round out the character sufficiently was taken during their character arcs) of all of the characters in that 'verse.

'Tis a very apt look into the characters, and exactly why Jack will always end up OK in the end.
Thanks for taking a look at it.

Thanks.
You managed to pinpoint & vocalise all the stuff I was vaguely turning over in my head.

See, I think that it is harder to write archetypes because they can so easily become boring easily unless they are done right.
Oh very much word. I meant from his POV (apparently *g*).

Sometime when I can take the time to research and find examples I am going to write a meta about how I think the most human and rounded characters on both AtS and BtVS were actually the Fanged Four. They always struck me as the most flawed and least archetypal (or at least if they began as an archetype the time to round out the character sufficiently was taken during their character arcs) of all of the characters in that 'verse.
Ooooh I'd like to read that. Esp because they all started out as one thing, and then reacted *against* that when they were turned (can you tell I just rewatched FFL?), and then had to deal with all the shades inbetween. Plus souls.

Thanks for taking a look at it.
My pleasure. :)

It's probably worth keeping in mind that Whedon was really only peripherally involved in most of Angel. The series was really, Tim Minear and David Greenwalt's baby. When they left, they hired Jeff Bell to take over the reigns.
Whedon acted more as an executive producer.

Sort of similar actually to the comics, where Whedon hands the reigns off to someone else to plot and write the Angel and Faith series. He did the same thing there.

I think Whedon wrote Angel as a metaphor, then never quite made it past the metaphor. Greenwalt and Minear ran with the character and used the metaphor in a different way - examining it as a sort of internal denial or mask. All you have to do is watch Amends and compare it to Dear Boy, the Prodigal, and Darla to see the differences. Or for that matter Becoming vs. Darla. And you see Minear saw Angel as more complex than Whedon did. I'm not saying Minear is a better writer, just that he was more comfortable, as was Greenwalt, in that specific genre.

It's probably worth keeping in mind that Whedon was really only peripherally involved in most of Angel. The series was really, Tim Minear and David Greenwalt's baby. When they left, they hired Jeff Bell to take over the reigns.
Whedon acted more as an executive producer.
M-hm. The problem of course being that Scott Allie is no Greenwalt...

I think Whedon wrote Angel as a metaphor, then never quite made it past the metaphor.
Like I said somewhere else - it's a bit like Twilight.

And you see Minear saw Angel as more complex than Whedon did. I'm not saying Minear is a better writer, just that he was more comfortable, as was Greenwalt, in that specific genre.
I just wish Joss would leave it all well alone. :(

Scott Allie? He's a comic book guy and fanboy of Whedon...I ignore him.
Fans don't make good editors of their idol's work...sort of counter-to-the-whole-I'm-unabashed-fan-bit.

Greenwalt and Minear weren't fanboys, but equals. Robert Downy, Jr is a good example of someone with more power and a bigger ego - getting involved with Whedon, and a bigger fan following. Whedon had to compromise for Downy, Jr.

Whedon: I write it, you say it.
Downy, Jr: Eh. No. You write it. I say it sucks. We work together until it makes sense.
Whedon: You work on the shots, and I'll go over here and write multiple versions and you can pick which one you like?
Downy, Jr. : Cool. You do all the work. I pick from a menu, works for me.

LOL!! Reminds me of George Lucas and Harrison Ford.

Lucas: I write it. You say it.
Harrison: George, dude, people don't talk like this. I'm changing it. Go play with your special effects.
George: Okey, dokey.

Whedon: I write it. You say it.
David Boreanze: But this is stupid.
Whedon: I can always kill off your character.
David Boreanze: alrighty then.

Whedon: I write it, you publish it or I hire someone else to write it and you publish it or I plot it out and you write what I want.
Scott Allie: But this plot makes no sense.
Whedon: Oh, look, IDW and Marvel over here...
Scott Allie: Okey-dokey, whatever you say, you are my Master.

Questions? Comments?

Seriously like that? XDD
I think that Whedon needs a balance, someone who can share his power about the characters, but not every fanboy's wrong.
Drew Goddard was a huge Whedon's fanboy, but he still created one of my favourite episode of all the time (Selfless).

Goddard was more a fan of the work than a fan of the writer, I think, and that makes all the difference. Helps greatly that he was an agent prior, and had written a lot of spec scripts - like Espenson, he tended to have a realistic view.

Whedon: This is the way it goes -
Goddard: Uh, you forgot that bit in season 2 where Xander lies to Buffy about what Willow is doing on the soul
Whedon: Oh right, not important.
Goddard: Beg to differ...(writes scene) and see it fits the climatic moment about Xander figuring out what Buffy is dealing with - it's the Buffy of the episode.
Whedon: Go with it!

I don't think Whedon wants to be worshipped. That's why he enjoys working with Goddard and Espenson...he likes to be challenged. Goddard proved himself outside of Whedon - as a director of a big blockbuster horror flick several years before...

ETC: Several years before Cabin in the Woods, not Buffy.
It was Cloverfield.

I believe that it's important love the works not the artist. I mean, you can also love the creator, because, of course, he puts himself in his creations and can be a great person, but the works are all the matters, in the end.

Agreed. Putting creators on pedestals...leads to much pulling out of the hair and stomping. Because they will fall off of them, eventually.

Also, you don't really know the creator except through their work...and they don't know you. You are interacting with their work not them, the relationship is with the piece of art not with the person who created it.
Sure they put themselves into it to an extent, but we tend to see their work through our own experience and perspective, and often catch things the artist never intended. It's what Whedon means when he says a piece of art or work of art is like a child, not a pet, it grows up, leaves home, and talks back to you. It has a life of its own.

Absolutely!
I still think that Joss is my hero, because he created some of my favourite things of all the time (Buffy, Angel, Doctor Horrible ...) but I love his vision, not *really him*. Same thing with SMG. I can't say that I love her, but I love her talent, her ability to portray her characters, especially Buffy Summers.
I tend to be optimistic about my favorite artists' works, I know. In fact, I was full of hope about Season Nine and I'm still hoping that Joss finally finds a way to make the comics better. Well, I can't help it!

You really think Allie is a Whedon fanboy? Given how much of his work he doesn't seem to care very much for, I'm not sure I think that. I tend to think it's more Whedon=Money. 'Cause once it appears to the audience that Executive Produced by Joss Whedon is just a stamp, there goes sales. His name is the only thing selling it.

That's why, I think, as the sales continue to drop it seems more and more comes out that Joss isn't all that involved. New Spike and Willow series? Didn't even hire the writers; Allie did. Spike's involvement in the trunk issues were determined by sales, not because of any planned arc (hence why it's changed 3 times already). When the final arc of S8 was being written, Allie was very, very careful not to admit is was writing most of it...until Joss said he was co-writing it. Now there is no abashment. As sales continue to fall--and they're gonna--I wonder what new information will turn up about who did what.

I admittedly have not read any of Allie's interviews or interactions since 2010. So probably missed the part where he said he didn't care for Whedon's later works. The stuff I read, Allie was gushing like a fanboy. But again that was between 2007-2010.

So...will have to go by your analysis.

That said, he doesn't have to be a fanboy...he can just be into the money and the fact that he needs Whedon more than Whedon needs Dark Horse.

ie.

Scott Allie: This plot makes no sense.
Whedon: Oh..look, IDW and Marvel...
Scott Allie: Don't worry, we'll make it work. No problem.

Oh, I don't know if he's a fanboy or not or how much of his work he likes. But from much of the things he's said, of Whedon's work he liked Angel. I've never got the impression he cared for BTVS or Firefly to a great extent. Sure, he gives the standard "I'm a big fan, blah, blah" you always gets, but the tenor of his words in commenting on them doesn't really back it up.

But yeah, he knows he needs Joss more than Joss needs him.

Eh, just another of the WTF things Joss has said since he started the meth and began writing comics.

Yes, but it does fit with everything in the show - see Shadowkat's comment f.ex. It's just that in the comics there's no one to stop him doing stupid things.

Russel T. Davies has the exact same blind spot when it comes to the Doctor...

I think on the shows he was always worried about keeping the audience there that wanted him to be the 'stalwart hero'. Your Special Snowflakes. That's why he's in vampface when he killed Jenny.

One thing I always complained about with Joss's writing of him is he backs off. He creates this possibly interesting undertone, then he puts on out in; he doesn't go there. Hmmm...Angel thinks about trying to turn Buffy (Amends). Interesting! Then he never really did anything with it.

Mmmmm. Like I said, RTD is just the same. Well, he was with Doctor Who. On Torchwood (Children of Earth specifically), however, he took his 'decent, handsome, stalwart hero' and went for broke.

Russel T. Davies has the exact same blind spot when it comes to the Doctor...

That's it, I'm jotting down my RTD-inspired meta on cracks (as opposed to crack) sometime next week.

*is thrilled*

decent - uh...

handsome - ...yeah, I'll give him that one.

stalwart - *gets dictionary*
Apparently, this means "loyal, reliable, and hardworking". So...
loyal - kinda?
reliable - hah!
hardworking - double-hah!

hero - nope.

Apparently Joss and I have very different definitions of, well, words.

Which is why I initially just presumed he was being ironic...

Vaguely related to the comics.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject