Whedon vs. Abrams
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Joss Whedon
dm442711 — 12 years ago(June 16, 2013 09:01 PM)
I am not sure if this has been a topic before or not, but it's a topic I thought would be interesting. Both have done tv and film. It also seems like certain tv shows made by these two could have easily been made by the other. I honestly don't know who I'd pick because Avengers is one of my favorite films, but lost is my favorite tv show. So, I would like to hear others thoughts
-
troydanl — 12 years ago(June 23, 2013 11:05 AM)
Joss wins this match, no question about it, and it's the TV work that does it.
At the movies, Abrams and Whedon are thus far a draw. Star Trek and the Avengers are about equally good movies, but Cabin in the Woods is much better than that hacky Cb68loverleaf. Super 8 was Abrams best movie, and Joss has yet to top it with his own cinematic output, though Serenity was an excellent continuation of Whedon's classic TV series Firefly.
The TV work makes the difference. Joss's TV work shames Abrams. Fringe, Lost, and Alias put together don't equal the sheer brilliance of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, the greatest TV show in history (bar NONE). Angel and Firefly also easily dust anything Abrams has ever made. Even the slightly spottier Dollhouse was (in it's second season) easily the match in quality and characterization of Abrams BEST series, Alias. -
chrystalr-906-994524 — 12 years ago(September 30, 2013 12:08 AM)
Actually, then I am high too. Fringe was interesting, but it could have been both written and directed a whole lot better.
If you wish to be moved: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TBd-UCwVAY&feature=share -
puirt-a-beul — 9 years ago(June 06, 2016 05:49 AM)
Thank you
, chrystalr, that makes me feel a whole lot better about my own response.
I've only recently watched
Fringe
, on the urging of friends, and I thought it started out well, but rapidly got more tenuous. Abrams makes much of claiming that he's story-driven, but
Fringe
had all the hallmarks of being a "what can we do next?" show, dragged out for the sake of longevity rather than because that's what the story needed. I found the last season a bit of a chore to watch; it's a pity for a show to finish that way.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment. -
aleusong3 — 9 years ago(December 24, 2016 06:22 PM)
The problem was that Abrams was only in charge of season 1 which in itself was a different se111cries from what all the other seasons would be like. I've watched all five seasons though and it was very good from beginning to end even though season 1 sorta created a disconnect.
-
thefinalword — 11 years ago(August 22, 2014 12:28 PM)
Joss writes cheesy little tv sitcom bickerings in my opinion. He should have stayed in Tv Land instead of taking a wonderful set of characters like the Avengers and turning it into a whining argument. I guess Whedon is the better writer because he has had more succe2000ss. But if The Avengers is any sign, I probably wouldn't be able to stand any of his characters or plots.
-
asquadrilli — 11 years ago(March 30, 2015 09:59 AM)
Totally agree.. seeing Whedon doing age of ultron made me sad. As much as I'm happy avengers finally got a film.. and it did have its moments.. it was just too cheesy. Give the audience some credit, man.. you know?
-
flickfix — 10 years ago(April 17, 2015 07:37 AM)
You can't compare the two. They are vastly different. J.J. excels in visuals. Far, far, far better than Joss. But Joss's writing is better. Both aren't very good writers though. Joss's characters are very good, but overall story arc is pretty lame.
Keep in mind J.J. still has those cliches of Kirk waking up with a woman ( or two women ) he doesn't know to show how "alpha male" he is, Spark having a relationship talk during fight, an astrophysicists showing us her boobs, Ethan's wife rescuing Ethan, those movie cliches. -
flickfix — 10 years ago(April 17, 2015 04:05 PM)
You can't compare Picasso to Monet to Warhol, can you? Or I.M. Pei to Frank Gehry to Zaha Hadid to Tadao Ando, can you? They are all different. This is arts, not sports. You can't lump them together as "basketball players" you can only lump them together as "athletes", and even so, it's still very different from sports.
-
flickfix — 10 years ago(April 17, 2015 05:27 PM)
Their style and focus is so vastly different that there's no way to compare them.
Whedon's characters feel very real and are very likable. You'd want to hang out with them and have BBQ with them. J.J.'s characters are just walking cliches. But, J.J. is good with telling stories visually, and has a better handling of grand scope. Whedon will take a grand scope and downsize it to family size, and his visuals are pretty lame.
It's like comparing orange to banana. Yeah, they are all fruits, and no one eats their skins, but they are still very different. I think all these versus mentality came from sports. I never think that way because I was never into sports and is into arts my whole life. -
shadypotential — 10 years ago(April 18, 2015 07:17 PM)
of course there is. you just did what the OP asked.
you compared their visuals and dialogues. I don't know how to make it any clearer. this has nothing to do with sports. both are directors and are at the top of their field. both write their own scripts, stay in the sci fi genre, and rely on family dynamics. -
flickfix — 10 years ago(April 18, 2015 07:28 PM)
That's like saying banana is long, orange is round, banana is yellow, orange is orange. It says nothing, in comparing the two. It doesn't say banana is better or orange is better. Banana may be better for ice cream splits and orange may be better for chocolate biscuits.