I am a fan of Alien Rez, not because of Joss Whedon's patchwork script, but because at least it had the familiar comedic elements of Jean-Pierre Jeunet and his usual returning ensemble cast (Ron Pearlamn, Dominique Pinon), as well as Sigorney Weaver being a badass mother.

Just my opinion. I love all of Jeunet's films; as wild and varied as the genres, his film style and character driven stories transcend the genre. City of Lost Child, Amelie, Delcatessen, Micmacs -- really excellent track record. Cool bit of science fiction in all of his films, even if just sort of a chaotic sense of fate and surrealism.

Ridley Scott is hit or miss -- but then again, Ridley Scott has far more a prolific film career so it's like arguing the planetary distances versus the intergalactic distances, we can't fully comprehend the multitude of influences involved in making a film and the secret to making it a good film, so what does it matter if it's 1 astronomical unit, 2 light years, or 26 billion light years, it's all beautiful art.

My kindness aside, his last 5 films: Robin Hood, Prometheus, The Counselor, Exodus, The Martian -- typical and BORING blockbustery movies. 1492 and everything after have been epic suck fests. Even Hannibal was a let down. They're all movies you're sort of excited about, if it weren't for the fact that he drags them out and adds little element of noticeable flair. Like Spielberg, hidden in realism. I want the stylistic elements of Alien and Blade Runner and Legend that PULLED YOU OUT of the movie experience to say loudly: This is art.

The soundtracks especially -- Ridley Scott replaced the original scoring of his movie Legend, which was a dazzling score by Tangerine Dream -- he replaced it with Jerry Goldsmith in rerelease... which sort of makes it all come full circle when you listen to the awful, typically EPIC score of Prometheus, minus all the atmosphere that the original soundtrack provided.

I hope this means Ashley Johnson's going to be in more Joss Whedon projects because I just, I just want to look at her all the time.

I disagree that it cannot be adapted to film. It could be done with a director that can function in a storytelling environment, which Snyder simply cannot do. The problem with Snyder was covered very well here recently, *related=http://videosift.com/video/Nerdwriter-Fundamenal-Flaw-Zack-Snyder-Batman-v-Superman
He was exactly the wrong director to have film this. I would have went with Del Toro or Whedon, but even they have their flaws.

Now, if the question is, can an adaptation be done that Alan Moore will feel 'suits' his vision? Probably not. He is an artist, in very good ways, but also in some very bad ones. He has a specific idea of how his creation must flow, which means he will never be satisfied with a medium outside of the graphic novel or comic.

Personally, I think one of the few un-adaptable works would be Gaiman's Sandman, but that's just my opinion.

I'm definitely not a film student (or a student of films). I'm not really savvy enough to confirm this guy's thesis about what Snyder is doing wrong.

But one part rang massively true for me -- when he talked about Avengers Age of Ultron and the farmhouse scene. Honestly, I didn't like Age of Ultron all that much, but that scene stuck out as a good one. From being a fan of Joss Whedon's TV shows, I think he is a master of making characters that we get invested in. We identify with them or see elements of friends / family / whatever in them, and that makes it much more rewarding to watch them do amazing (or even mundane) things.

That farmhouse scene in Age of Ultron was a really good example of that. And I didn't feel anything like that, at all, for any of the characters in Batman v Superman.

I don't know that Whedon's very character-centric approach is necessarily a whole lot better for creating extremely compelling storylines either, but I think it can cover a lot of blemishes in that department.

@gorillaman, I admit I'm veering close to the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but equally, I never claimed that all feminists were sane and moral people.

The difference is, I think most people these days are reasonably feminist and I think the vast majority of them are not man-hating nutjobs. There's undoubtedly a lunatic fringe, but that's the case for every group/ideology.

I also agree that meanings change over time. "national socialism", shorn of its historic baggage, doesn't sound that terrible. But we know that what it actually signifies is actually national fascism, racism and other abhorrent concepts.

The question is at what point the lunatic fringe comes to represent the whole. For example, at one point the Republicans were once the party of small government and fiscal conservatism, but it's becoming increasingly more difficult to describe them as anything other than the party of religious nutjobs and idiots.

I don't feel feminism has been hijacked to the same extent. I believe there are still a lot of normal rational people who describe themselves as feminists (I'd like to think I'm one, for a start).

Finally, I'm with Joss Whedon.... "feminism" is a terrible word, but ultimately, "You either believe women are people or you don't. It's that simple."

So every ship in the Firefly universe contains the same crew of characters spouting Joss Whedon dialog?

Excellent writing. This is why Whedon excels.

epic!

Whedon is all of your masters

Maybe the trailer is designed to attract the kind of audience who likes Transformers movies? They do make a lot of money, despite how shitty they are.

Anyways, Avengers 2 should be much better with Whedon at the helm.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'firelfy, serenity, joss whedon, nathan fillom, captian malcolm reynolds' to 'firelfy, serenity, joss whedon, nathan fillion, captian malcolm reynolds' - edited by Fusionaut

Though I'm surely forgetting some more obscure work, I certainly can't think of any Aisimov novel or short story that has ever been transitioned into a decent film.

It's possible, as ChaosEngine alluded to, that the Foundation "trilogy" could make a decent film trilogy or miniseries, but it would require an exceptionally good screenwriter and director to make it work--and a LOT of creative liberties. It just covers too great a timespan, too many characters with complex and cross-generational relationships, and frankly very little of real significance happens during reasonable spans of time. Frankly, and though I can't claim to have read all of his works (though probably most), Asimov is probably best left in the realm of literature.

What we really need is a film version of the damn Sprawl Trilogy. I mean, that's just begging to be made into a trilogy of films. The screenplay would almost write itself. I'd say Joss Whedon should direct.

That's not what @Shepppard said. He said "I've never looked into anything to do with feminism in the media" (emphasis mine) in response to your point about how the word has been under assault in the media.

For the record, I am for treating everyone equally and as such, I'd call myself a feminist. At the same time, I think it's a terrible choice of word. We don't call anti-racists "blackists" or "jewists", or lgbt supporters "gayists".

Personally, I'm with Joss Whedon

He's one of those actors that need a good director and script. If his first big break was with Whedon and not Lucas, he'd have an Oscar or Golden Globe or something by now. At least an MTV award...

At least Portman got out from under the shadow. That's a good thing.


Now that I think about it, wasn't Anakin supposed to be 14 or 15 in Clones? He was what, 6 in Phantom Menace? Playing it like a mewling child just might be correct. He was just too obviously older.

@bareboards2 such withering scorn!

Why are you making a big deal of the fact a male sent you that cartoon? Did you expect that I would respond with something like "oh a MAN sent it? Well, if it wasn't some awful feminazi type, then it must be right!"?? I would have thought that our interactions on this site would be enough for you to realise I don't think that way. The originating gender is irrelevant.

As it happens, I fully agree with the video.

What I dislike is the idea that any group of humans does not have a place in a discussion around interactions between other humans. If this was a discussion about an all-male field (let's say a male pro sports team), are womens opinions not relevant? Sure, you should have some basic knowledge of any subject before you espouse an opinion on it, but I think gender relations is a topic that pretty much everyone has at least some experience of.

The solution to past exclusionary, discriminative or even downright abusive practices is not more exclusionary practices. When Joss Whedon said "feminists are just people who think women are people too" , is that not a useful contribution?

I agree that it's not about making men the subject, but surely a white hetero man's opinion on gender, race and sexuality is no less valid than a black lesbians?

I'm watching TMNT but this is Joss Whedon so I'll come back and fall in love with it later.