why did you do this joss

anonymous asked:

It makes me very sad that they intended to bring Tara back in S7 but couldn't because her actress wouldn't come back :( which is also why I don't get why they don't bring her back in the comics. Whedon said he wanted to bring her back in the show (a year after her death) so... Since the comics don't require the actress, why haven't they done it?

Amber Benson did refuse to come back in Season 7, as a First Evil manifestation in Conversations with Dead People (“I just think bringing her back and making her a bad guy was not quite right for me, but I know there’s a way to do it that would be beneficial to the fans.”). Then Joss Whedon said he intended to bring Tara actually back in an episode exactly one year after Seeing Red, in which Buffy would be granted one wish and reverse Tara’s death – ironically, in this same panel he mentioned he’d soon be filming the now canceled project Ripper. Here’s a good interview with Amber about the case:

“You had people who posted on the Internet saying, ‘Thank God, Tara’s dead!” Benson recalls, “but then this plethora of people going, ‘Oh. My. God. I’m never watching that show again!” Apparently, they meant it. Buffy’s ratings dropped an average of 15 percent following Tara’s demise. “Really?” Benson responds in surprise when I mentioned it. Whedon eventually washed his hands of the controversy by claiming he “didn’t care” about social issues, but it wasn’t so simple for Benson. “[Joss] wasn’t Tara,” she explains. “He didn’t walk in her shoes.” […]

Does she believes killing Tara was a mistake? “What I feel and what they chose are not the same thing, but… I wish they hadn’t killed her,“ she says. Benson was asked to return as Tara – actually, as an evil version of Tara – in Buffy’s seventh and final season. […] “There were a lot of other reasons [I didn’t go back], but one was that I didn’t want [Tara] to go bad,” she says. “As an actor, of course, it appeals to me to play kind of evil and bitchy and sexy, but, as a human being who gets letters that say, ‘I didn’t kill myself because of what you and Alyson did,’ that part of me goes, ‘You’re not just an actor anymore; you’re making a social commentary now, baby. You’ve got to be responsible.’ And I couldn’t be responsible coming back, because as an actor you have no control.”

And what about Joss Whedon’s accusation over the summer that he had always planned a glorious, romantic reunion for Tara and Willow but Benson played the spoiler? You can almost hear her wince over the phone. “Yeah, that’s been bandied about in the press a lot,” she sighs. “You know, sometimes people tell you one thing in this world, and then things don’t turn out the way you’re told,” she says. “Who knows what Joss had 100 percent planned in his mind? I’m not psychic. I just didn’t want anyone else hurt after everything that had happened. When a character has that kind of social impact, you just don’t have the right to do anything else to her. I know Joss had good intentions, but for me, personally and professionally, it wasn’t the right decision. Besides,” she says, “I was super busy. I’d moved on from Buffy.”

So the question is: why did they kill Tara in the first place? Was she ever a priority? Why this attitude of playing like everything was meticulously planned? Would her return in other circumstances confirm it as a mistake? Why this current repetitive effort in explaining it would be unfair to bring her back, instead of trying to create a story in which it wouldn’t? Why didn’t Willow have a lasting and developing relationship ever again? Why do some characters simply go away, others are killed, and some are resurrected? Why Buffy doing the bare minimum for women and LGBT representation guarantees the series to be always remembered as a good women/LGBT show? Why do tropes like bury your gays, queerbaiting, and women in refrigerators are still a thing?

I think you know the answer.

rendingrosencrantz replied to your post: rougeserpent replied to your post: …

it’s okay you can say “it was joe wheat-thin” 8)

i blame joss whedon but i also blame just. god just. everyone. the whole thing. it was like they started making joss whedon’s personal fantasy solo sequel to The Avengers and then at the last minute realized that they had had a to-do list From Marvel, the entire time, of Mandatory Important Stuff they were supposed to do and just. started cutting the wrong things out and leaving the wrong things in and they accomplished absolutely nothing concrete and EVERYONE WAS OOC AND EVEN MR BOB COULDN’T SAVE THE TONY CONTENT EVEN THO HE TRIED SO HARD it was just. it was so bad @ joss why would you do this to me personally and create this kind of environment and tell this kind of story and Make This Thing Exist

Carly is basically doing what Joss is doing to her. Also hasn’t she learned from what Ava did? She judges Ava (which I get cuz her son died) but she is about do something and got some same motives???

Also she knows what it’s like to have people pull receipts @ her. I am really waiting for Jason to come in and be like ‘hey listen people told me all your dirt and I still was your friend why do you think Michael will ditch Nelle? Especially when he is just like me and you keep saying Nelle is like you????’

ew.com
'Captain America: Civil War' star Scarlett Johansson on the scrutiny of Black Widow
Black Widow never has it easy. Onscreen, Natasha Romanov has an agonizing backstory and is working like hell to do enough good to erase the red...

In one scene EW watched being filmed this summer, she and Tony Stark have a quiet moment after being given an ultimatum to bring down the rogue Cap — or else the U.S. government will do it in permanent fashion.

Stark rubs at the center of his chest, where his ARC reactor was once embedded. “You know the problem with a fully functional heart…? It’s stressful,” he tells Natasha.

She’s all business: “We are painfully understaffed.”

“It’d be pretty awesome if we had a Hulk,” he tells her.

But they don’t. And Widow, still harboring feelings for Bruce Banner, who was last seen venturing off into self-imposed isolation in the Avengers’ Quinjet — knows that better than anyone.

How did Bruce Banner going away at the end of the last movie leave her feeling, after she reached out to him and he turned her away — then ran away? I imagine that there are a couple of ways you could respond to that. Maybe you want to call it abandonment or whatever it is, exactly. Vulnerability, rejection. I think that you can turn inward and be very hurt and bitter and that would have been an easier choice. But she understands that Banner did what he had to do. Certainly she’s not going to be the person to chastise someone who’s not ready to open up. I don’t think she’s taking it personally.

Is she kind of like, “Hey, your loss?” I don’t think even it’s that. I think she’s just, it’s not the right time. It’s one of those things where you think of the person with a lot of fondness. You keep that in a warm place in your heart for them. It would have been very easy for us to take that and turn it into bitterness in this film and have her be reactive. But that would be out of character, I think.

Will that storyline continue? I don’t know. There is little room for romance in Civil War; I think there is a lot going on that doesn’t really involve big heart-to-hearts. I mean it’s certainly in there and there’s references to it. But this is not the opportunity for us to explore the Widow’s deep, personal backstory.

Aaaaand a bonus for those who throw around “Scarlett hates brucenat”: 

Do you get much input into what she does and what she says? Of course. And what her motivation is for making the decisions that she does. I had a lot of conversations with Joss about what she sees in Banner. Or why is she, at this point in her life, able to be open in this way? We both followed that storyline with a lot of confidence that it was the right arc for my character up until that point.

She did her due diligence. Scarlett cares about Natasha’s characterization, bless.

Originally posted by ryuzaki-lester

anonymous asked:

it's not interesting nor exciting that joss wheden is a part of dceu and has a say in casting and pretty much everything else. him "loving these characters and being passionate about them" is not a good thing. do we not remember what he did to marvel characters?

I’m pretty sure my followers know that I’m not a fan of Joss and wish he wasn’t apart of the DCEU so why are you sending me this…. I didn’t send myself that anon message. Idk why they included him in the message in the first place. 

Joss Whedon be like...
  • The Avengers: let's make Natasha a sexy heroine and leave out a romantic subplot but let's also hint of a past/current relationship with Clint and a potential future relationship with Steve
  • The entire world: Heck yeah Natasha rules! Clintasha! Romanogers!
  • Age of Ultron: let's just forget about how Natasha totally kicked ass in the first film and leave out her character development from Captain America: The Winter Soldier and set her up with Bruce Banner, oh yeh and I'll just toss in Clint's secret family, cut out Loki's cameo, Kill Pietro and maybe just add a few moments between Natasha and Steve because I'm Joss Whedon and I can.
  • The entire world: Da Hell? Brutasha? Where the hell is Loki? What about Betty? Nooooo not Pietro! Joss, what did you do to our babies?
The Whedonite Phrase Dictionary

So that you guys can understand what we’re saying:

“Bored now.”: I’m bored/I wanna flay someone alive.

“Grr Argh.”: I’m mad.

“Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal!”: Some character on some show turned out to be evil/some awesome show got cancelled/some character I love got killed.

“Did I fall asleep?”: Sorry I haven’t posted anything for the last two hours. I fell asleep watching Dollhouse.

“I love my captain.”: I love Joss/I love Nathan Fillion/I love Firefly.

“Shiny!”: Really awesome.

“Five by five.”: Fine.

“My food is problematic.”: This is gross.

“Why don’t you come in from the entire lack-of-cold?”: It’s too hot outside.

“Watcher’s pet.”: Suck-up.

“Teacher’s pet.”: You’re gonna get raped by a giant praying mantis.

“Because it’s WRONG.”: You can’t do that.

“Frak.”: You’ve got the wrong fandom, buddy.

“I’d like to test that theory.”: I respectfully disagree with you. But not respectfully enough to not have an epic battle of the Dark Arts right now.

“I cried like a baby. And I was evil!”: [any regular character on Angel]’s death gave me so many feels.

“It’s a sham with yams. It’s a yam sham.”: Happy thanksgiving!

“Your shirt–”: GET AWAY FROM ME I’M BUSY CRYING OVER FICTIONAL LESBIANS.

“Say, you all didn’t happen to do a bunch of drugs, did ya?”: Are you high?

“I think this line’s mostly filler.”: I don’t know what to say but I feel like saying something.

“Bitca.”: Bitch.

“I’m a leaf on the wind.”: I’m crying.

“I’ve got a theory…”: I have an idea.

“Rest in peace.”: It’s so cool when Spike sings.

“Buncha wanna-blessed-bes.”: Hipsters.

“She-who-hangs-out-a-lot-in-cemeteries?”: YOU HAVEN’T WATCHED BUFFY?

“She saved the world a lot.”: I hope you liked my three-hour-long explanation of why Buffy is awesome. Have a nice day and I expect you to have completed the first season by Wednesday.

“Spank your inner moppet!”: Get it together, bitca.

“Out. For. A. Walk. Bitch.”: I’m not stalking you.

“There are three flowers in a vase…”: Stop doing what you’re doing right now and do what I tell you.

“The world is a mess and I just need to rule it.”: Let’s not have a political debate right now, okay?

“I think I’m kinda gay.”: Alyson Hannigan is too hot for me not to be a lesbian.

“I can kill you with my brain.”: Don’t piss me off.

Random Buffy Thought

Post-Chosen stories where Buffy is a suicidal wreck because Spike is dead puzzle me.  I can believe she had feelings for him at the end.  I can believe those feelings were love, in the moment of his death.  (I also think that if he had survived, she’d very likely have panicked and backpedaled and been very glad of that “no you don’t” out, but that’s another story.)  I’m sure that losing him hurt, but Buffy never tried to kill herself over Angel, or her mother, each an arguably much more traumatic loss.  Buffy was never actively suicidal even in the depths of depression.  If death had come knocking, she might have opened the door, but she didn’t go out hunting for it.  

Heck, even Spike, the quintessential romantic obsessive, didn’t walk into the sun when Buffy died, did he?  Why do people assume Buffy wouldn’t do the same thing he did – mourn, move on as best you can, and fight on in the memory of loved ones past?  (Which, if you go by the comics, is exactly what Buffy did, though possibly minus the mourning part – Comics Buffy in S8 seems to have dealt with Spike’s death by doing her damnedest to forget he ever existed.)  I guess that’s not seen as ~romantic~ enough, but does anyone seriously think that Spike would want Buffy to off herself to prove her love?

There’s some evidence (her dream in the short webcomic Joss wrote) that Buffy felt guilty about leaving Spike to burn up in the Hellmouth, but Buffy feels guilty about everything.  More importantly, she was proud of him for dying a hero.  I could not love you half so much loved I not duty more, etc.  I’m not saying that Buffy would never, ever contemplate suicide, but I think it would take a hell of a lot more than losing Spike to get her to that point.

Why do you write these strong woman characters? Why are you even asking me this? This is like interview number 50 in a row! How is it possible this is even a question? Why did you write this down? Why don’t you ask a hundred other guys why they don’t write strong woman characters?
—  Joss Whedon

anonymous asked:

There s something still bothering me about hendall. I wasn't in the fandom for Haylor but any girl harry has been linked to has always been very public. We ve had very little public stuff with hendall, which tbh worries me. There s all this stuff in the press about harry wanting to keep his love life private, and that seems to be what's happening. I don't get it. If it's pr then why don't we see them together? Is it because harry is a bad actor? And why the hell is he still in la?

Imma go a little off base on this one, but bear with me; I’ll get to the point, I promise.

I don’t know if you’ve ever seen the television series Firefly? Even if you have, you might not be aware that the creator, Joss Whedon, helped revoluntionise a CGI technique that was remarkably effective at drawing viewers into the scene.

Whedon aimed to bring a sense of imperfection to the sci-fi setting. The plan went beyond “shaky cam” — lights would be placed to purposely create lens flares, shot composition would be routinely off-balanced, and actors could drift offscreen and reappear thanks to the claustrophobic interior of the spaceship set. But the team broke new ground when the action jumped outside the ship. They captured the “Serenity” flying through space like he was manning a news camera; although the shots were precisely constructed in postproduction using computer graphics, they felt spontaneous.

“Joss made sure the visual effects fell into the same photographic approach, it’s ‘accidental,’ and therefore truthful. And we did it on purpose!To the viewer, it feels improvised — an image caught on the fly. He cites documentaries as the reason why an audience inherently trusts this kind of shot. 

If the above techniques sound familiar to you, that’s because it’s so effective everyone is doing it now. They did it in the Hunger Games, in Star Trek, in Man of Steel. They’ve been doing it in ‘found footage’ movies for years - think Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project.

The bottom line of it is, if you’re trying to set a scene for your audience and it looks too deliberate and clean and neat, your brain realises that there’s something wrong and there’s no emotional response to it. If it looks a bit shit, slightly out of frame, out of focus etc, if it feels less like you’re being sold something and more like something you’ve just stumbled across it; it feels and seems real.

Do you see how this can be applied to Haylor vs Hendall?

Quite simply, 1DHQ are learning from their previous mistakes. Haylor was universally panned for being over-the-top, highly staged and completely ham-fisted. The way it played out was the sort of ~romance~ that only a small child or gossip magazine would believe in.

So 1DHQ are doing better this time. They’ve learned that the more it looks like they’re trying to stay private, the more everyone is going to believe it’s true. The same thing happening with Louis and Eleanor. There was loud criticism at the amount of publicity (and HQ shots) of the pair, suddenly, all that followed were blurry fan sightings. 

The Kardashians are already terribly hyped and known for being fake; deliberately subtle and ‘low-key’ is the only way they were ever going to get away with selling this as genuine. Especially relevant is the fact they’re insisting they’re ‘just friends’; it makes it seem as if they’ve got something to hide, doesn’t it?

Hendall’s tactic is hoping people agree that ‘Where there’s smoke, there’s fire’, whereas Haylor was “Hey everyone, look at this fire! Do you see it? Do you see the fire? Boy, there sure are a lot of flames in here. Yep, there’s flames and heat and everything. Fire!”

And, of course, let’s not forget what a terrible actor Harry is. There’s no way he’d be able to pull off pretending he’s got even the remotest sexual interest in women, let alone one as dim as Kendall.

FYI, I bastardised this article for the quotes above. It’s well worth the read.

So it’s two days after I went to see Age of Ultron, and I’ve had time to process it more fully.

Here is the thing: The spoilers did not make me happy, but I was willing to be proven wrong in my initial judgments of the film. Anyone who doubts that can to stalk my tumblr from the time in which spoilers about CATWS starting coming out. I was sure that movie was going to be a messy clusterfuck, but in fact, it ended up being easily the best movie that the MCU has ever delivered. I am willing to admit when I am wrong, and I was wrong about the movie that  I thought CATWS was going to be. It was amazing.

I was not wrong about AOU, and it was not amazing.

The non-spoilery reaction is this: The Avengers are billed as Earth’s Mightiest Heroes, and I should absolutely leave their movie feeling good and upbeat. That does not mean that the movie has to be watered down or made simple - I felt good and upbeat after the ending of CATWS, and that movie dealt with torture, enforced servitude, shadowy government organizations violating civic rights for a perceived public good, PTSD, and dementia.

AOU was a movie about an evil robot ffs and I could not feel good when I left the theatre.

So that’s your warning before you click to read more. I fucking well despised everything about this movie. This is not a positive post. There were things I enjoyed about this film, but they are the size of a Krabby Patty and the rest of the film is the size a herd of elephants. I am not here to gush about this film. You want to do that, go do it in your own space, because if there is one thing I am fucking tired of on tumblr in the past few days, it is fandom’s ongoing self-righteous indignation and insistence that people have to be positive in anyway about this vile wretch of a film. Fuck you, I don’t owe you that, and if you think I do, well. Whedon owed us a good film and he sure as fuck didn’t deliver it so we don’t always get what we want.

That being said, this is why I hated this awful film

Keep reading

anonymous asked:

Is it true that Scarlett doesn't like hulkwidow?

It is absolutely, completely, 100% false.

And anyone who says otherwise is lying or taking quotes out of context. 

Here’s the most important quote Scarlett has on the matter: 

How did you feel about Natasha’s romance with Bruce?

Scarlett Johansson: It was very unexpected for me, actually. According to Mark, he was like, “I saw it all along!” But when I read the script, I said to Joss, “But why? Is this out of convenience?” And he was like, “Gosh, do I have to explain everything, Johansson?” Ha ha … But actually when I started to work through the scenes with Mark, I was like, “Oh, of course these characters are together.” Because it’s not just beauty and the beast, it’s like, these are two people who have experienced so much trauma and are so traumatized by their own pasts, they’re haunted by their own memories, they’ve witnessed and been a part of such destruction.

I think with Banner, he’s had this kind of out-of-body experience. He feels very disconnected and sort of like, in some ways, taken advantage of, because his experience within that destructive world is an out-of-body one. He’s in it, but he’s out of it, it’s another body. And for Widow, she’s a mercenary and was part of this widow program, and she’s never really chosen any particular path for herself, which can leave you feeling very much outside of yourself and isolated. And now these two characters have finally come to a place where they’re like, “OK, we’ve put in the work, right? We’ve put in the hours. Can we have our lives? I want a life, you want a life …. ” And like any epic romance, “I see me in you, and this is exciting, and why can’t we have this? We deserve it like everybody else.”

But they have this huge calling that’s larger than their love potential, or whatever, could be. So it’s complicated. It’s a really complicated relationship that they’re in. I hope that they have their time. I think it’s maybe a case of bad timing for them. But it’s fun to explore, definitely, with Mark, and we both, like, get it, what that relationship is. And it’s nice that it’s more complex than, “Oh, hey, over there. I saw you hulking out. Wanna grab coffee?” [x]

She has said that that she thinks the characters want more and that she “hopes they have their time.” 

She’s also said that she’d love to do a Black Widow movie, and although the interviewer didn’t ask about it, she’d love for Joss Whedon to direct. Clearly, she has no problem with his interpretation of Nat. 

Read the following for more info:

Scarlett Gets It, Contrary to Popular Belief

Scarlett’s Interpretation of Brucenat

anonymous asked:

Does Whedon give a fuck about continuity in the MCU? I ask because I noticed that in AOU, Roddy, who in IM3 had a change of image and went from War Machine to Iron Patriot was War Machine again, even the suit was the one from IM2, and Fury, who at the end of Winter Soldier said he was done directing SHIELD, is directing SHIELD again. After passing the torch to Coulson in AOS. And after the show had a whole season about the new SHIELD and how other agents had also created a new SHIELD. WTF?

 OH MY GOD I DIDN’T EVEN NOTICE THAT! You know, to me it just seems like Whedon is  sabotaging all the other movies that came out and that he’s directly following the events in the first Avengers movies. He’s probably like: “who even is Bucky Barnes? What do you mean there were two Thor movies? who is Sam Wilson, why is he here?” 

He fucked up Nat’s character (I mean yes, I wanted to see another side of her, a side that is vulnerable and stuff but what he did is just outrageous), he fucked up by not adding Bucky to Steve’s vision together with Pegs, he fucked up by so many things in this movie… and those things you said are probably just a cherry on top as they say.

I’m so glad he’s not directing Civil War and will not direct any other Marvel movie ever again.

attractiveugly  asked:

why was joss whedons characterization of Steve Rogers in The Avengers not good?

there was zero sass, and the attempts at “sass” were weak and sounded as if you plucked a 90 year old out of time, grouchiness included. 

Lets start with the “theres only one god” line. First of all, steve was never said to be a catholic in the MCU, thats basic comic knowledge, but to spew his religion everywhere like he did by basically demeaning thor and loki of their God-like status was not something that steve would do. Steve isnt quick to denounce someone of their title. If someone is named loki and their brother is thor, and they claim to be gods, its not too difficult to put two and two together.

Also calling natasha ma'am, that was so stale. Steve onlycalled peggy ma'am after she had addressed him as captain, natasha had only said cap in an informal setting. So for steve to call that to someone he just met, probably earlier that day as well. 

Also having steve not know how to work anything in modern times is utter bull shit. Howard said that Hydra was decades ahead of where the US was, and steve had learned how to use some of their material, the “steve is completely useless with modern technology” gag was horribly done and there was literally a cut scene of him using a tablet to look at files and whatnot. steve isnt an idiot too, he knows what the hell a cell phone is.

Forcing steve to comprehend technology that a normal person wouldn’t understand and calling it his incomprehension of modern technology is weak (the speak english, it seems to run on some form of electricity line). No shit steve wouldnt understand how to use complicated machinery like that. 

Steve was so serious in avengers, he was put there to yell at tony and be a punchline. 

I have a lot more to say on this topic, i just got lazy and dont feel like writing it all out. Id literally have a short book by the time im done

A Romanogers Rant

This ship.

THIS SHIP.

It causes me pain. I feel a sadness and a gut-wrenching sorrow when I think about it. It makes me want to sit in a corner, and roll around, and cry. Do you know why?

Because it isn’t. Freaking. CANON.

Did you watch CATWS, Joss Whedon?! Did you???? They are a PERFECT. MATCH. They are compatible and adorable and sorrowed and they complement each other and understand each other and fix each other and they’re PERFECT AND BEAUTIFUL.

So why, Mr. Whedon, is BRUCENAT a thing??????????
It should not exist. It should never have existed. You know what DID EXIST AND COULD HAVE BEEN CANON?!?!?!???

ROMANOGERS.


I am crying horrible tears. Because of this. Thank you for your time.