WB to reboot Buffy the Vampire Slayer without Joss Whedon

[John Crichton]

Yeah, you can have strong female characters without making all of the male characters either have a propensity to turn Evil (Angel) a goofball comedy relief (Xander) or untrustworthy (Giles on several occasions. Split loyalty between Buffy and the Watchers for a time anyway...) or just flat out evil (everyone else, Mayor Wilkins, The Master, Spike (off and on), Jonathan, Warren and Andrew, Caleb).

There were plenty of evil females on Buffy so cherry picking to make a point doesn't make it true. In the cases of the supporting characters your descriptions of them simply aren't accurate. Angel's character wasn't a bash against men, it was a story point about the love that couldn't be. Buffy is a tormented character and for that you need partners that create massive conflict. And that conflict created one of the best moments of the show when she had to make the choice whether to kill him or not. Giles was a father figure and became more so as the show progressed. He was very trustworthy. And Xander was a goofball but also a great and loyal friend.

If the show was a good example of "femenazi" storytelling, Willow would have never succumbed to addiction, Buffy would have treated Riley better and Buffy herself wouldn't have been such a flawed character overall. You can bend it all you like but the men weren't all treated as buffoons, incompetent or any other negatives one could drum up.

Yes it's a reverse of what women have had to deal with for a long time and still do to an extent. It doesn't excuse it though.

As I outlined, there is nothing to excuse.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

There were plenty of evil females on Buffy so cherry picking to make a point doesn't make it true.

Really? Glory, Druscilla, Maybe Amy? I dont count Faith because she eventually gets her redemption arc. Anya? Nope, redemption arc. Adam's creator, I forget her name. was she really evil though? No not really just obsessed with her charges and technology. So who else? Unless you're talking about characters in a lot of the standalone episodes where I'm pretty obviously talking about major characters and or big bads which I dont see as "cherry picking".

If the show was a good example of "femenazi" storytelling, Willow would have never succumbed to addiction, Buffy would have treated Riley better and Buffy herself wouldn't have been such a flawed character overall. You can bend it all you like but the men weren't all treated as buffoons, incompetent or any other negatives one could drum up.

I still contest that the men except in few instances (admittedly I'd forgotten about Reily) were depicted pretty shoddily. The male characters for the most part havent really changed much from who they were when they were introduced.

For example, contrast that with over 5 seasons of Angel, we get to see how Wesley's character actually changed and GREW. Did Xander, really? Giles? Yes, Giles got more fatherly and began to trust Buffy more but all of his changes really centered around Buffy and wasn't he kind of written out of the show for almost a season? And Xander, he was always loyal and protective of his friends and a bit of a goofball. He he got a little more confidence by the end of the show and lost an eye (which was kinda awesome) but did he really change all that much? Not really.

To address your other point, the fact that it's a show aimed at empowering girls and women, where would it be if the women characters DIDNT have something to overcome?

Listen, I own S1-5 of that show so it's not like I wasn't a fan. And it's a good show for those 5 seasons (although like I said I think it peaked in S3) but yeah in hindsight I think it pushed the feminist agenda fairly strongly during it's run. I dont think that was something that wasn't pretty obvious, where we differ is in how under written and one note many of the male characters were on that show. I'm not saying that you have to agree with me it would be nice if you wouldn't ascribe ulterior motives to my opinions though. Accusing me of "cherry picking" and "drummin up" stuff is like accusing me of fighting dirty and D00d? I'm not even FIGHTING here...

 

[John Crichton]

Really? Glory, Druscilla, Maybe Amy? I dont count Faith because she eventually gets her redemption arc. Anya? Nope, redemption arc. Adam's creator, I forget her name. was she really evil though? No not really just obsessed with her charges and technology. So who else? Unless you're talking about characters in a lot of the standalone episodes where I'm pretty obviously talking about major characters and or big bads which I dont see as "cherry picking".

Faith most certainly counts no matter if she was redeemed or not. Anya was absolutely evil for a while. Willow was evil for a while as well. That said, I would absolutely say that the best villains were primarily male.

I still contest that the men except in few instances (admittedly I'd forgotten about Reily) were depicted pretty shoddily. The male characters for the most part havent really changed much from who they were when they were introduced.

For example, contrast that with over 5 seasons of Angel, we get to see how Wesley's character actually changed and GREW. Did Xander, really? Giles? Yes, Giles got more fatherly and began to trust Buffy more but all of his changes really centered around Buffy and wasn't he kind of written out of the show for almost a season? And Xander, he was always loyal and protective of his friends and a bit of a goofball. He he got a little more confidence by the end of the show and lost an eye (which was kinda awesome) but did he really change all that much? Not really.

Your point that I took issue with about was that the male characters all having negative characteristics to make the females look better by comparison. When did character development come into this? Different discussion for sure on that one. Still, I'm still not seeing any concrete examples of your point.

To address your other point, the fact that it's a show aimed at empowering girls and women, where would it be if the women characters DIDNT have something to overcome?

Listen, I own S1-5 of that show so it's not like I wasn't a fan. And it's a good show for those 5 seasons (although like I said I think it peaked in S3) but yeah in hindsight I think it pushed the feminist agenda fairly strongly during it's run. I dont think that was something that wasn't pretty obvious, where we differ is in how under written and one note many of the male characters were on that show. I'm not saying that you have to agree with me it would be nice if you wouldn't ascribe ulterior motives to my opinions though. Accusing me of "cherry picking" and "drummin up" stuff is like accusing me of fighting dirty and D00d? I'm not even FIGHTING here...

The show had a very obvious feminist push, I have no problems with that. It was impossible to miss!

I'll just ask ... why are you now talking about characters being underwritten and such when that's not what we were talking about?