Awesome Writing in Media: Steven Moffat #DrWho #Sherlock

Okay, I know this guy is polarizing. He makes you want to shake your fist at him and scream, "MOFFAT!" as all your feels are ripped out--which you might have hugely mixed feelings about while it's happening--or you want him to disappear faster than a person does when touched by a Weeping Angel (that was a Dr Who reference, by the way).

But you can't deny that he has writing talent.

Most people became aware of Steven Moffat when he took over Dr Who from Russell T. Davies (and then would proceed to make us have all the feels while watching), but, in reality, Moffat had been involved in Dr Who much, much longer than that.

He's actually responsible for many of the best episodes. I'm a huge fan of 10 (David Tennant), and Moffat wrote many of his best story-lines and/or episodes. Don't believe me? Take a look.

My personal all-time-favorite episode of Dr Who is The Girl in the Fireplace. It's such an interesting story--full of time travel (literally), romance, and intrigue. Moffat wrote the episode.


Another of my favorites is Blink, in which we get to meet the Weeping Angels for the first time, and also in which the world was gifted the famous "wibbly wobbly, timey wimey" quote. Moffat wrote the episode.

And the two-parter, Silence in the Library and Forest of the Dead, where we meet River Song. Moffat wrote the episode.

He excels at writing gripping stories with a bit (okay, a lot) of heartbreak and romanticism often attached. His wheelhouse seems to tend toward darker material, which I think is why a lot of people were, errrr...displeased?...when he took over Dr Who. But that didn't stop most of us from watching.

He'll be stepping down from running Dr Who soon, though.

Fortunately, his strong points also lend to his other project, Sherlock, which he's a co-creator/writer of with Mark Gatiss (who also has the role of Mycroft).

I can't say I've ever been displeased with an episode of Sherlock. Every time, the episodes are well-crafted and paced, and full of exactly what we as an audience want. I hope he uses his extra time to work on more episodes.

Hint, hint.

Love him or hate him, you can't deny that Steven Moffat has written some of the most iconic British television we've had the privilege of watching.

What do you think?

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media: Mean Girls

Continuing on with the Tina Fey love-fest (Tina, if you're reading this, I swear I'm not stalking you), I couldn't resist posting a bit about one of my all-time favorite movies: Mean Girls.

This is one of those movies I'll happily sit through again and again, and it was actually everywhere this past weekend because October 3rd is, unofficially, "Mean Girls Day". It's from a line in the movie. The voice-over (done by Lindsay Lohan who plays Cady) is talking about a boy she has a crush on who is in her math class. I'll let the picture explain it:

That's it in a nutshell. So, of course, the movie was on, and we watched it. For the record, my husband loves it too. Mean Girls is for everyone.

Quick summary: Cady Heron is the new girl at school after years of home-schooling and living in Africa with her academic parents. Unsure how to navigate teenage social norms, she befriends the "Plastics"--the queen bee clique--and a few misfit students who hate the Plastics and get Cady to spy on them. All goes well until Cady falls for the ex-boyfriend of Regina George, the Plastic's leader. But can she keep from becoming the kind of person she hates before it's too late?

One of the most quotable movies of all-time (no statistics; just because I said so), the writing (Fey did the screenplay, which is based on a book by Rosalind Wiseman) is sharp and on-point. It's a rare movie that can make you sympathize with the characters so much without becoming overly sentimental and mushy. Quite the opposite; Mean Girls is scathingly funny and clever. It's more than a collection of quotable one-liners; it's the writing in general that makes the movie so memorable.

It captures what it's like to be a teenage girl without jumping the shark (too much). We tag along with Cady as she tries to fit in at her new school, cringe when she makes social faux pas, and smile when she figures out how she fits in in her new life, for better or worse. Part of why it's so engaging is that we've all known people who remind us of the character archetypes: the new kid, the misfits, the queen bees, the put-upon teacher who believes in the students, the mom who goes to great lengths to be her kid's friend and not a parent, etc. We can revisit our own teenage years without actually having to suffer through them again.

And, despite coming out in 2004, the movie even ages well.

As a side-note, if someone tells you they don't want to watch it because Lindsay Lohan stars, they're missing out. Whatever her personal troubles, she's a good actress and shines in her role.

Are you a Mean Girls fan? What's your favorite line? C'mon, you know you have one. Share it in the comments!

xoxo Sarah


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other posts in this series:

Joss Whedon

Quentin Tarantino

Horrible Bosses

Book of Mormon

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Mad Max: Fury Road

30 Rock

Awesome Writing in Media: 30 Rock

Okay, so I've given up with the "Part 7" or whatever in this series. It was too much to keep track of. But don't worry; I'll post the links to the other entries in this series at the end so you can check them out, and will continue to do so when I write each new Awesome Writing in Media post.


This post is about what I'm now pretty sure is my favoritist show EVER. I see you making that "Oh, really? EVER in shouty-caps, you say, Sarah?" face.

Yup. And I'm preemptively apologizing for the love letter that follows.

30 Rock was created by (former) head-writer and occasional cast member of Saturday Night Live (and occasional Sarah Palin impersonator) Tina Fey. It's a satiric comedy loosely based on her time on SNL--30 Rock revolves around a fictionalized live sketch comedy show that airs on NBC. Fey also stars in the series as Liz Lemon. Alec Baldwin plays her arrogant conservative boss and mentor, Jack Donaghy, and Tracy Morgan and Jane Krakowski are featured as Tracy Jordan and Jenna Maroney, two of the actors on the show TGS with Tracy Jordan. Liz Lemon has to juggle them, TGS, and her personal life.

Anyway, I seriously don't know what was wrong with me but up until this summer I'd never seen more than a handful of episodes of 30 Rock, and those were by accident. I'd enjoyed the ones I had seen, and since hubs and I needed something to break up the wall of concurrent episodes of Buffy and Angel we were watching, the timing was ideal.

Netflix came to the rescue, and soon we were partaking in 22ish minutes times 7 seasons of comedy gold.

The show, when it aired, was a hit with critics though it didn't garner huge ratings, but it was consistent and was renewed through seven seasons. Fans were hooked, and we were too.

The writing is superb--there were very few episodes that fell flat, if at all. 30 Rock is a satire as I mentioned above, with its off-the-wall characters (a ridiculous in-house doctor with a just-as-ridiculous name, and a quite-possibly-immortal NBC page--seriously, go look up Kenneth fan theories...) and out-there concepts for episodes.

A few memorable episodes and/or story arcs:

Jenna is in a movie and no one can understand what she's saying when she says the title.

Liz has to travel, takes cold medicine, and hallucinates Oprah.

Jack finds out who his biological father is--and he happens to be a super-liberal professor from New Hampshire who also needs a kidney.

Liz keeps running into a man she can't stand and they end up dating because they can't get away from each other.

Jack insists there needs to be a new cast member for TGS, so he and Liz go to Georgia to connect with "real" America and scout talent.

Tracy finds out he's a descendant of Thomas Jefferson.

Jack's enormous cookie jar collection might cost him a chance at being the GE chairman.

Jenna is shooting a torture-horror movie in Connecticut, and the state says they have to make the movie more tourism-friendly.

Liz is busy on Sandwich Day (a day when the Teamsters get sandwiches from a special super-secret deli for everyone), and someone eats her sandwich. The writing team tries to get her another one.

Jack gets married to a hot Fox News anchor who gets kidnapped by Kim Jong Il.

Tracy's wife gets a reality show.

Jack has to make an important decision, and meets future-Jack and past-Jack.

Jenna tries to get the lead in a Janis Joplin movie, but they don't have the rights to her life or any of her songs.

Liz's sketch, Dealbreakers, takes off, and she's offered a Dealbreakers talk show.

Jack has a perfect 24 hour period of solving problems, and Liz threatens his winning streak.

And many, many more.

I also discovered that Liz Lemon is my spirit animal. She's a writer, loves to eat, is delightfully nerdy,
and, best of all, my husband turned to me after watching an episode (I don't remember which one), and whispered, "She's YOU."

I almost forgot to mention that there are actually two live episodes (yes, they're also on Netflix).

The show is snarky and funny, entertaining, and absolutely worth bingeing in if you can.

Have you seen 30 Rock? Were you a fan? Let me know in the comments!

xoxo Sarah


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other posts in this series:

Joss Whedon

Quentin Tarantino

Horrible Bosses

Book of Mormon

Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Mad Max: Fury Road

Awesome Writing in Media, Pt.6: Mad Max: Fury Road

No, I haven't lost my mind, and I haven't been abducted by pod people. A Tomatometer score of freaking 98% fresh can't be wrong. Just trust me on this.

So, full disclosure, I haven't seen any of the previous Mad Max films. I've heard that they're good; hubs has seen them and enjoyed them, but I never had the chance to. Nothing against the movies--it's one of those things where the occasion to watch one never really came up (or there was something else I'd rather watch on). But I love a good action movie as my lucky husband can attest, though, to be fair, I'm game to watch pretty much anything. It's him who doesn't want to watch Sharknado...

The previews for Mad Max: Fury Road all looked as good as any summer popcorn blockbuster could--explosions, ridiculous vehicles, vibrant settings, lots of intense staring. Hubs and I agreed that it was one of the ones we'd see this summer (besides any Marvel outputs) that was an absolute must to view on the big screen.

Sorry, Pitch Perfect 2...you'll have to wait for Netflix.

Hey, stop throwing fruit--I loved Pitch Perfect (the first one), but you really can't argue that it's a must-see for a giant screen. It comes across as good on our television as in the theater. I'll see the second one, don't worry...keep your shorts on.

Anyway, a quick scan of the Internet with the husband's help caught me up on the Mad Max mythology, though it must be said (by me here, and by many others on the web) that you don't need to know much at all, if anything, about the previous movies and the timeline. Fury Road stands on its own, no Googling required, and isn't hard to follow.

In my effort to keep the majority of the posts under the Awesome Writing in Media tag spoiler-free, I do want to concentrate on why I chose this movie to appear in the series.

The writing (Fury Road was directed, produced, and co-written by the creator of the whole damn thing, George Miller), is a prime example of what editors (and writers) always tell you is best: showing, not telling. The dialogue is minimal--there are grunts and noises and spoken words, but actual conversations between characters is rare. Instead, we're treated to a talented group of expressive actors (and let's not forget the stunt people) showing us what is going on.

And show they do.

We don't hear Charlize Theron's Imperator Furiosa telling us that she's devastated about a new piece of information she's learned (sorry, I did promise no spoilers); instead we see her fall to her knees, face and body racked with emotion.

We don't hear Imperator Furiosa say what she intends to do, or why she's gone off track with her war rig; instead the reason is told to the audience through exposition.

We don't hear the reason Mad Max is, well, mad; instead we see the horrifying images that haunt him through violent, detailed flashes.

Mad Max: Fury Road is the best example I've seen in a long time of minimalism, at least in actual dialogue and writing. Now, that's not to say that there's no plot; that couldn't be further from the truth. The plot is heavy and driving, very like one of the intimidating vehicles seen on screen. The whole thing is a spectacle, and one of the most satisfying movies I've watched in a while.

It's a testament to George Miller's skill and vision that this movie (which, from what I understand, had quite a few bumps along the way to getting made) is as amazing as it is.

Have you seen Mad Max: Fury Road? What did you think?

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media, Part 5: Captain America: The Winter Soldier

Because I'm nice, below are links to the first four parts of this series (or you can search by the tag Awesome Writing in Media on the right in the sidebar).

Part 1: Joss Whedon

Part 2: Quentin Tarantino

Part 3: Horrible Bosses

Part 4: The Book of Mormon

So we're at part five, which, if you couldn't tell from the title, is about a comic book movie.

Yup.

For those of you rolling your eyes right now, feel free to click the little "X" in the corner. But I recommend that you don't... Captain America: The Winter Soldier is completely deserving of a place in this series.

There have been comic book movies for a long time spanning different franchises, but I'm not going to talk about those, either in terms of their successes or failures. We'll save that for another time. However, I will say that Marvel seems to be getting it right where others haven't quite succeeded in the same way (caveat: Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy is kind of its own animal). The Marvel movies are well thought-out, carefully crafted, and have a great continuity spanning the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The concrete schedule for these movies now easily goes into the late 20-teens with rumors of movies being scheduled out as far as the late 2020s, which in this time of "let's do a sequel to this movie 20 years after the original, yeah, that'll work!" movie-making, is almost unheard of.

And while, as I said, there is plenty of continuity between the movies, they each feel as unique as they are similar. That probably doesn't make sense, but whatever. A viewer won't confuse Iron Man or Thor (the movies or the heroes), and Guardians of the Galaxy, which has been kicking ass at the box office this summer, has a distinct sense of humor and a swashbuckling feel to it--kind of like if Star Wars had been entirely about Han Solo and Chewie (but with much better writing...sorry, George Lucas). That movie probably deserves its own entry here too, but for the rest of this, I'm going to concentrate on Cap.

The first Captain America movie was good. It had a vintage feel to it with it being 99% set in the 1940s, and it gave Chris Evans a chance to prove his acting chops in a role as something other than a smart-ass frat-boy. It all worked. We rooted for skinny Steve Rogers and post-serum Capt. America Steve Rogers. But it's the rare movie that outclasses its predecessor.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier, was a fun, well-acted, action-packed movie, but above all else, the writing was superb. We got a smart political thriller--think Three Days of the Condor starring Robert Redford (who, incidentally, is also in CA: TWS, and who is awesome as always) with a side of super hero action. I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone, but I will say that there are plenty of twists and turns during the film, and it's a credit to the writers that they managed to keep them from tangling. The writers also didn't treat the audience like a collection of idiots; they assumed you were paying attention and keeping up with what was happening. I can't remember there being any plot holes (really big ones, at least). The pacing was good--difficult to do in any type of movie, though in my inexpert opinion, I'd probably guess that it's hardest to achieve in a fast-paced action film) and the movie never felt like it was moving too quickly or too slowly. In fact, I remember having no inclination to check my watch. But I did have the urge to see the movie again immediately.

If you're on the fence about watching some of these, they often get better. Avengers was written and directed by Joss Whedon (the subject of Part 1), as will be Avengers: Age of Ultron. The writing in the Phase 1 movies (the earliest in the MCU) was good, but some of the more recent ones (CA: TWS, Avengers, GotG) are better writing-wise by leaps and bounds.

Have you seen CA: TWS? What did you think?

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media, Part 4: Book of Mormon

In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I talked a bit about two notable writers from the television and movie worlds: Joss Whedon and Quentin Tarantino.  And in Part 3, I diverted a bit to discuss the movie Horrible Bosses.  Providing you haven't thrown your hands up in despair for my taste in awesome writing in media, here's another one for you.

Here in Part 4, I'm taking another turn, this time in to the world of theater.  My husband and I have been very lucky to enjoy quite a few stage productions over the years (though we'd always be happy to see more of them), and, like movies, the hype is often built up so much about one that you're left feeling wanting and let down after seeing it.

I'm happy to report that this was not the case with Book of Mormon.  It's a freaking 9-Tony-award-winning musical that's both a satire and comedy, written by the team of Trey Parker and Matt Stone (the creators of South Park) and Robert Lopez, who apparently worked on the writing for Avenue Q before that, at least according to Wikipedia.  And that, ten years ago, was a sentence I never thought I'd write.

I should mention that if you're of the easily-offended variety, be it about religion or lady-parts, you'll probably want to stop reading here.  Thanks for stopping by, and avoid this play like the plague.

Everyone good now?  Awesome.

The premise is that two young, naive Mormon missionaries are assigned to a remote village in Africa to bring the Book of Mormon--the sacred text of the Latter Day Saints--to the people there and baptize them into their faith. Unfortunately, the missionaries have difficulty connecting with most of the locals, who are ruled by an evil warlord obsessed with female circumcision.  I don't want to give any more away than that, because this is just something you have to see for yourself.

The plot and characterization are unmistakably Parker and Stone; the whole play seems as though it's a live-action version of the best South Park episode you've ever seen (minus the core characters, obviously).  The Mormon missionaries, villagers, and the rest of the cast are full of caricature and satire, overdone in the best possible way.  Even the social commentary is spot-on and universal; when I saw the play, it was in London at a West-end theater, and I think the audience mostly consisted of British people--everyone loved it, and everything translated just fine. If anything, they thought it was funnier, because they got to poke fun at Americans.

As for the music and lyrics, those fit in with the plot and dialogue and never felt out of place.  Whether the characters are singing a cheerful song which title translates to "Fuck you, God!", or one about repressing negative thoughts or homosexual feelings, it all works.  And by works, I mean has you laughing your ass off.

But, Sarah, you may be thinking.  You can't possibly lump this play in with the likes of Phantom of the Opera, or Les Miserables, or any other amazingly popular musical?

No, you can't.  They're apples and oranges and pomegranates; you can certainly be fans all of them, but Book of Mormon is fresh and interesting, and an entirely different fruit altogether.  Plus, Phantom doesn't have a spooky dream sequence in Hell, and Les Mis seems to be missing some crossover references with The Hobbit, Star Trek, and Star Wars.

One caveat is that I think Book of Mormon is probably geared toward a younger audience (40 and under, I'd guess) or those of any age who aren't easily offended.  My parents enjoyed every minute of it when we took them.  Good writing is universal, so go see it in London or on Broadway, or even one of the touring companies if you can.  I don't think you'll be disappointed.  Just don't wait; it often books out months in advance.

Have you seen it?  What did you think?

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media, Part 3: Horrible Bosses

Okay, bear with me on this one.  I've decided to jump around a bit and will, instead of solely focusing on individual writers in this series, also focus on works as a whole.

Also, just so you don't feel obligated to stop reading, I won't spoil any of the movies or other media for you. Promise. Or, at least I'll try not to.

Hopefully none of these, so rest easy.

That doesn't mean I won't talk about the plots or characters, but I'll try not to give something away that would ruin the movie(s) for people.  On the other hand, if there's a movie (or its source material, if it was based on a book) that's been out for a long time, all bets are off.  People whining about Martin Freeman "spoiling" something in one of the Hobbit movies are ridiculous...that plot point has been out for seventy-something years.  Suck it up, buttercup.

Anyway, onward!

Honestly, Horrible Bosses wasn't a movie I initially had high hopes for.  Sure, I knew it would be entertaining--the cast includes Jason Bateman, Jennifer Aniston, and Charlie Day among other notables--so when it came out and we got it on Netflix, I was looking forward to seeing it, but was expecting your standard comedy.

How wrong I was.

Now, this post, as are all of the posts in this series, is just my opinion, but I enjoyed Horrible Bosses far more than I thought I would, and that was due just as much to the amazing writing as to the great performances by the cast.  Was it a perfect movie?  No, of course not, but it was a smart, well-written  comedy.  And in the current movie climate, that is a rare thing indeed.

What was so good about it?  The cast, for one, deserves a lot of credit for their kick-ass performances, but the writers made it all happen.  The premise of the movie is that three guys each have a boss that makes their lives absolutely miserable--so they figure out that they'd be so much better off if the bosses weren't around anymore (in the dead sense).  See, it would have been so easy for the writers to phone in a script where the characters were flat and boring and made the illogical--and extreme--jump to murder to get their lives back.  But it's far more than a case of "Ugh, my boss is annoying." "So is mine!"  "And mine!" "Let's murder them!"  One of the main things that stands out about the script is how well-rounded and justified the characters are.  Each one of them--the bosses and our heroes--are shown in the beginning of the movie so we see exactly how each of the characters' lives are impacted by their, well, horrible bosses.  These hard-working folks are being slowly driven crazy by these people, and we, the audience, buys it hook, line, and sinker.

I like to say that with writing--any kind of writing--the audience or reader needs to identify with the characters or believe the story they're reading or watching could happen, even a little itty bitty bit.  Sci-fi, comedy, romance, action--doesn't matter.  If the audience doesn't buy into it, your movie or book is dead in the water.  And even though each of the bosses in this movie are caricatures, between the three there will be a tiiiiiiny bit of a supervisor you, the viewer, have had at one time, and that's enough.  You're in and along for the ride. 

Oddly, nothing feels forced about the movie.  Sure, some of the scenarios are ridiculous, but it's a comedy, and my suspension of disbelief never felt like it was about to snap.  The way everything ties together at the end is satisfying and, again, that's credit to the writers.

Will all of this hold true for the sequel?  I have no idea; it's a rare sequel that can recapture the magic of the original.  I guess we'll have to find out.  In the meantime, if you're looking for a fun, well-written comedy, check out Horrible Bosses.

Have you seen it?  What did you think?  Was the writing above-average for a comedy nowadays?  Have you seen one that you thought was far better?  Tell me!

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media, Part 2 : Quentin Tarantino

Back in Part 1 of this series on awesome writing in media, I discussed my love for Joss Whedon.

But this time around, I wanted to talk about someone a little more polarizing...Quentin Tarantino.  The more I talk to people about him and his movies (which include Pulp Fiction, Django Unchained, Inglourious Basterds, among others), the more I'm convinced that you either love him or hate him.

Most of the movies Tarantino has made he's both written and directed, and has taken home and/or been nominated for quite a few awards for his work.  Like him or not, he's a talented guy.  And I happen to enjoy his movies.

Why?  Because they're different.  There's this odd mix of extreme, bloody violence, unique plots, and interesting dialogue--complete with gratuitous swearing.  Tarantino makes movies that aren't formulaic; he makes the movie he wants to make, and because he has his hands in so many aspects of the movie-pies, he has a lot of creative control to do just that.

So, what about these movies do I enjoy so much, exactly?  As with Whedon, Tarantino has a knack for dialogue, but not in the same way.  While Whedon's is quick-witted and sharp, Tarantino's dialogue is real.  His characters have long, odd conversations, and they do it in way that makes you think you're eavesdropping on real people.

Here are two examples that always stick out in my head when I talk about his dialogue writing style (which, oddly, happens more than you'd think).  The first one is from Pulp Fiction, and is a conversation mostly between John Travolta's Vincent Vega and Uma Thurman's Mia Wallace.  Vincent has been charged by Mia's husband, Marsellus Wallace, to take Mia out for the evening to make sure she has fun while Marsellus is away.  They go to a restaurant called Jack Rabbit Slim's, where she orders the famous Five Dollar Milkshake and later enter a dance contest.  Their conversation in this scene isn't really related to the rest of the movie, but somehow fits anyway.  Check it out below... (language is NSFW)

The other scene that stands out in my head is from Reservoir Dogs during which the characters discuss tipping.  The cast is quite big in this movie, but for the clip below to make sense, the only thing you need to know is that the group of men here are a bunch of criminals--which makes the scene even better.  Again, like the milkshake scene above, their conversation has no real relevance to the rest of the movie, though it gives the viewer a sideways look at their characters and their personalities.  A perfect example of what I try to drive home to the lovely authors I work with: show, don't tell.  As with the other video, the one below has plenty of NSFW language...

There's something about a scene where a group of criminals argue over tipping, including defending the hard-working waitress.

Along with Tarantino's unusual style of dialogue go his unique stories and plots.

Want to hear a story about a female assassin who wakes from a long coma, only to discover that the child she'd been carrying has been taken from her womb and that she needs to exact vengeance upon the ones who wronged her?  Yup, got you covered.

Want to watch a WWII movie about Jewish U.S. soldiers who conspire to assassinate Nazi officials, including Hitler?  Check!

How about a story about a freed slave who, with the help of a German bounty hunter, is on a mission to rescue his wife from a plantation owner?  Sign me up!

He weaves tales about characters from all walks of life, even rewriting history in Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained.  Some even theorize that all of his movies take place within the same insane universe.  Personally, I think that's very plausible.

Why Tarantino Films Take Place in the Same (Insane) Universe -- powered by Cracked.com

And it would take a good storyteller to be able to weave that kind of thing together over so many years.  For reals.

I also give Tarantino a lot of credit for his story and directorial quirks...  Things like his distaste for brand names, so he makes up his own products (Red Apple cigarettes and Big Kahuna burger are just two) and uses those instead of product placement.  That allows the viewer to concentrate more on the story than on the overly-commercialized movie they're watching.  Okay, that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but everyone can think of at least one movie or television show where you begin to roll your eyes at all the product placement.

Most of the points in this post are just my opinions; plenty of people can't stand Tarantino's movies for the exact reasons I've listed that I enjoy them.  They're too out there; too violent; too meandering in their conversations.  And that's okay.  They're not for everyone.

How about you?  Are you a Tarantino fan or not?  Do you only like some of his movies?  Do you have a favorite or one you particularly can't stand?

xoxo Sarah

Awesome Writing in Media, Part 1: Joss Whedon

So I've been in my little writer/editor cave for the past few months, working my little writer/editor butt off on various projects.  The problem with that (besides neglecting this blog, which I clearly maintain with the sporadic manic-ness of a coke-addict), is that my poor husband gets neglected as well.

Quality time is at a premium, you know.

So, like many busy couples nowadays, we have to make the effort to spend time together.  Our "thing", ever since we started dating, was to watch movies together, which then spread into shared television shows.  And with the plethora--jeez, I've been hitting the thesaurus too hard--of media out there, we've found that we need to minimize our watching in order to maximize our time and enjoyment, if that makes sense.  

Let me back up a bit so this makes more sense.  I've never been much of a comic reader, but many of the movies he's dragged me to (the dragging was what happened initially; I went willingly after I realized I enjoyed them) were comic book movies, the Marvel ones in particular.  

A couple of years ago, one of their movies was in production--a little picture called Avengers, or Avengers Assemble if you're over here in the land of tea and scones.  You may have heard of it.  Anyway, at the time, I kept reading online that some guy named Joss Whedon was going to be writing and directing it.  And amid everyone else's flailing and fangirling and fanboying, I was all, "Sooooo... I guess this guy's written some stuff before this, yeah?" 

To which I'd get this reaction: 

And then I'd be all, "What? What'd I say? Why do you all suddenly have pitchforks and other pointy objects?"

Because at that point, I'd never seen anything he'd done before. Yep. I was that person. You can stop hating me now, though, so put down the stabby things--I'm totally on the Joss Whedon bandwagon.  

While the other Marvel movies were good, Avengers was, well, kind of in a class of its own.  Even though he was juggling multiple characters who had (mostly) each had their own movies already, the writing was tight, the characterization was taken to another level, and it all just seemed to work.  I can't even explain it.  Maybe it was magic.  I couldn't stop smiling for days after seeing that movie, so naturally we went and saw it again.

After that, I asked my husband if we could work our way through Firefly.  I'd tried to watch it before on a friend's recommendation--and I'd hated it.  I have no idea why; just something about the first episode or two didn't resonate with me, so I gave up.  But this time around I told myself that even if it wasn't my cup of tea, it was only on for, well, less than a season (sorry for poking a sore spot, Firefly super-fans), and I could suck it up and watch it all.  We did, and I immediately wanted to set fire to Fox studios for cancelling it.  *NOTE* For legal reasons, I feel I should say I was just speaking in metaphor--I'm not going to burn any television studios (or any building, for that matter) to the ground.  It seems like a lot of work, for one, besides being highly illegal.  **Edited Note** Unless there are spiders. Then all bets are off...

So we decided to tackle another of Joss Whedon's works, this time, the ultimate one, according to fans: Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  A quick note: Joss Whedon worked on the movie of the same name, but his script went through re-writes by other writers to make it more...well...what it was.  The show isn't particularly related to it, if at all.  

We're currently getting ready to start season 3 of Buffy, and consequently, season 1 of Angel.  We've been told by fans to watch these concurrently, because they aired back-to-back, so that's what we'll be doing.  Also, my husband and I went to high school around the time Buffy aired--she and her friends were going through high school at nearly the same time we had, so there's this weird sense of nostalgia while watching the show.  I'm pretty sure I owned most of Willow's sweaters.

Anyway, I suppose I should mention why I enjoy Joss Whedon's work, as opposed to just taking a whole blog post and fangirling to my little heart's content.  

He "gets" characterization, for one.  They're not all good or bad, not black or white, but delightfully flawed shades of gray.  Loki, the main nemesis in Avengers, has moments of real sympathy (and it's not all because Tom Hiddleston is ridiculously hot) because of the writing.  Captain "Mal" Reynolds of Firefly, played by Nathan Fillion, can be pretty heartless--as the captain of a ship that primarily smuggles goods and often deals with unsavory characters, he has to be--but he has so many redeeming qualities that the viewer sees him as a well-rounded person, not just a flat character.  Buffy isn't just a ditzy blonde mess who simply stabs things that go bump in the night; she's a teenager with teenager problems and teenager concerns.  One of my husband's favorite characters on Buffy is Cordelia Chase (played by Charisma Carpenter).  She's a vapid, rich, daddy's girl, but there's something endearing and oddly sincere about her, what she says, and how she interacts with the other characters.  She's far from one dimensional--though she easily could have come across that way in the wrong hands--and is a valuable part of the show.

Dialogue is another of Whedon's strong points.  All throughout his work (so far), I've noticed that the conversations between characters are snappy and real.  Are people that clever in real life conversations?  Some are--I've met some--but most aren't, and that's what makes Whedon's dialogue enjoyable to listen to.  Upon watching Buffy, I can often hear in Xander Harris (Buffy's friend played by Nicholas Brendon) some of Tony Stark's snarkiness that would later appear in Avengers. Was Tony snarky in the Iron Man movies before Avengers? You betcha. But he was extra-cleverly snarky in Avengers. My blog, my analysis. So there.

Because of Whedon's strong writing, the shows are smart.  There have been multiple times when we've been watching Buffy and something about the episode occurs to us that hasn't appeared to have caught the notice of the characters, and a few seconds later they acknowledge it.  Example:  On Buffy, Cordelia catches the eye of the new Watcher (the person in charge of research, training the Slayer, and keeping them informed), Wesley.  They're clearly attracted to each other, though Wesley is probably in his twenties, and Cordelia is a high school senior.  My husband turns to me and asks, "But she's eighteen, and he's not even a teacher there! There shouldn't be any problem with them even dating if they wanted to.  What's the deal?" Literally a minute later while we're watching a scene at the prom, Giles, the school librarian and Buffy's previous Watcher, tells Wesley to just ask Cordelia to dance because she's eighteen, and he has the "emotional maturity of a blueberry scone."  See, most shows just drag out drama like that for no reason, almost like the characters are too obtuse to realize that they're making things more difficult for themselves and each other.  However, the viewer gets the sense that Whedon respects the viewer and their intelligence; that he believes we deserve better.

What's your favorite Whedon show or movie?  Thoughts on what I've discussed above?

xoxo Sarah