This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"I find lentils completely incomprehensible."
11973 members | you are not logged in | 14 July 2020


December 08 2008

Who should direct 'Twilight' Sequels? Nikki Finke says "Pro: 'Where’s Joss Whedon when you need him?' 'Who has more experience with teenage vampires than Joss?'".

"Con: 'Or do you think he wants to keep his vampire prowess relegated to Buffy and not mess with another vampire world?'"

What? No. Please, no.
It would never work out. Joss wouldn't be allowed to kill anyone off. Alas.
It wouldn't work because even Joss' weakest, most cliched characters have more layers than the wangsty characters in Twilight. Trust me.
Yeah, but he could have Edward kill Jacob & Bella realize that she can't love Edward anymore cuz he killed her friend. It would piss off all the Twilight shippers and end the franchise. Fun!
And pigs may fly.

...though I do like your idea, jcs - it's got a fresh boldness or a bold freshness. So does C. A. Bridges' little pastiche.
Think about that quote a second. Joss has experience with "teenage vampires." Teenage vampires?
C. A. Bridges, your story is hilarious. I especially love the friends with the "We love you" banner + "I'll never fit in over there!"
Yeah there were a few teenage ones in there. Anyway, the obvious answer here is... a world of no.
HA I love the second comment under the article... apparently they were thinking the same things we are because it says that Joss would be a bad Idea because Edward and Bella wouldn't get their happily ever after.

I would watch it if it was guaranteed that one of them die or at the very least ended up severely crippled ;)
(and tripping over shit does *not* count as being crippled)
I like how this post title kind of makes it seem like this is some sort of real industry discussion, rather than just random people expressing their personal opinion.
I hope we've seen the last of Joss telling other people's stories anyway. He's got enough ideas of his own.
milk just came out my nose..., no.
Let me add my enthusiastic voice to the chorus of "NOs."

Seriously, Joss's work is way more complex and interesting than Twilight.

Thankfully, I don't think he would ever do it. Directing an episode of a clever TV show here and there is one thing, but he does his best work when he's writer/director.

[ edited by Septimus on 2008-12-09 02:35 ]
Think how twisted Twilight 4 could be if he directed it though. It'd be a horror movie with vampires and werewolves where the most horrible parts were their humanity.
I don't want to have to try and force myself to pay attention to Twilight, whatever it is, let alone try to like it.
Leaving aside the story issues, if they really want to start filming the next two movies in friggin' March, pre-production needs to have started yesterday. Joss is otherwise occupied with Dollhouse, and likely would be so at least until the beginning of principal photography.
Wow. I'd totally watch "Lightning"!! Author Lyzabeth Mary Sue Powers is well deserving of her new-found success. Will Rose and Francis ever make it in this tough new world? Will her classmates accept their love? Oh, the suspense! The intrigue! The sophisticated writing style! I can't wait!! Thanks for the heads up C.A.Bridges!

Oh, and NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO to Joss ever seeing/hearing Twilight. Unless he does a parody, in which case I humbly request the inclusion of NPH.
Generally, no. From the little I know of it, the only way it would work would be to have Joss doing a parallel story, like Connie Willis's To Say Nothing of the Dog paralleling Jerome K. Jerome's Three Men in a Boat. I doubt it would happen, but could be great fun (Joss's story being the light one of the pair.)
Here's my vote for Joss directing Lightning. C. A. Bridges: thank you. Best Twilight parody I've read so far.

Oh, and hear hear to having NPH in it.

[ edited by Taaroko on 2008-12-09 03:10 ]
Thanks, but no thanks.
From a limited repertoire of Hollywood directors I can name: Eli Roth.

The key to the Twilight series, I believe, is to view it as if it was something by Marquis de Sade, only with the egoistic sex substituted by altruistic love. They are otherwise remarkably similar: juvenile, myopic, immoral (but de Sade declares himself much more elegantly), impassioned, titillating, aggravating, disturbing and lots more words I can't remember right now. I think Eli would do well here. (And I liked Hostel.) My harp needs new strings and I will put it away.

Joss could do a good job with it though, iff(mathematics spelling) he gets to write it.

ETA: By writing I mean without interference. And by good I mean for sane people.

[ edited by hence on 2008-12-09 04:07 ]
I like vampires. I like teen shows/movies. I spent the entirety of my experience watching the Twilight movie feeling like my soul was vomiting.

So yah. Add me to the chorus of Nos.
What a ludicrous idea.
The sad part is, there are people on that list who might actually consider it, for cachet and money, but (is there html for glowing bright neon lights) Not.Joss.
He likes telling his own stories, anyway.

When I first read about Hardwicke being fired from the franchise a few days ago (she was on a publicity tour in Europe with the cast when she apparently got the news) I was disgusted. Part of the article read thusly, emphasis mine:

The word from inside Summit is that Hardwicke, the acclaimed Thirteen director, "was 'difficult' and 'irrational' during the making of Twilight," one insider explains to me. "That doesn't mean anything when you're talking about a filmmaker because they all are, but still...

I thought that was an incredibly shitty thing to say. And it isn't.true.

[ edited by Tonya J on 2008-12-09 03:47 ]
I liked Twilight. I got lured in by a trailer promising much more action than the movie offered, but I am glad I did. It wasn't the deepest story by any means, but it was refreshing to watch a teenage romance that did not involve everybody sleeping with each other.

Y'all are questioning whether Joss would direct the sequel; I question whether he could. Joss has shown a tremendous understanding of the issues that push and pull and torment teenage youth, but would he be capable of exercising the directorial restraint that would allow him to be true to this series?

I like the verses that Joss creates. I will watch or read anything that he has a direct hand in creating. I like the dialogue, the angst, the humor, and I especially like that every love/sex affair has consequences, which is what separates his works from most of the tired rubbish being made today.

But Twilight is a story about desire and abstinence, and that last bit is not a theme that exists in Joss's world. I gather for him, abstinence is just that brief period of time that exists before you give in, not a recognizable value or goal that some people try to maintain/pursue in the face of great pressure both from within and without.

As I said, I look forward to everything Joss does. He has a unique storytelling voice that I truly admire and respect. I am excitedly looking forward to Dollhouse whether it lasts five seasons or five episodes. However, I don't think Joss and Twilight are a good match- not for either of them.
I also feel some empathic kinship with Hardwicke and consider her being replaced with disdain, had the same reaction as did Tonya J to that quote in DHD.

I say she earned the right to continue the franchise. Bad studio, bad!
Get him on Harry Potter. Or Star Wars (remaking the prequels? and then "Return of the Jedi"? and, heresy, the other ones?). And then he writes his own bestselling novel. Hurray for alterna-Joss. Except that normal Joss is pretty okay too. And alterna-Joss is probably evil. So, bad idea.
I predict that the next director will be Mira Nair. You heard it here first.

And lottalettuce, abstinence? Not in the end.
If he does it, can Angelus cameo and kill everyone? please?
(or any other evil, really, as long as they all die. painfully.)
I think they're idiots to not bring back Hardwicke when "Twilight" is this studios only real franchise and Hardwicke's film is up over $135 million in the US.

Of that list, I actually think Jonathan Frakes would be an interesting way to go. "Roswell" aside, who didn't love "First Contact"?
Considering how much Twilight feels like Roswell with vampires, maybe Jonathan Frakes would be the best choice.
One advantage to him directing the sequel: He wouldn't have to hear that "Why do you write such strong female characters?" question anymore. ;-P
I just don't ever want to hear him being asked "Why do you take jobs away from competent talented women?"
Just the thought of Joss directing twilight drains my soul...

...worst book ever!
Anyone who has actually seen the movie or read the book, say "I."

I expect to hear less I's here than in the phrase "ashamed of my fandom."

[ edited by patxshand on 2008-12-09 06:12 ]
Only because the movie would make money... Otherwise I wouldn't want him anywhere near it.
"I", to all four books and the movie. And while it's been fun abusing them on this thread, I really appreciated lottalettuce's comment. Excellent point about Twilight's theme of abstinence versus Buffy's theme of consequence. That being said, my biggest beef with the Twilight saga was actually the lack of meaningful character death throughout. Joss and J.K. Rowling have together sold me on the merits of that concept, and the complete lack of it in a series that involved so many life-threatening situations and almost showdowns between loads of supernatural beings just seemed weak. Especially when absolutely everything else that could have ended well for the main character did, and then some. Yay for the happy ending and all, but when did they earn it? That was why I thought the suggestion of Joss directing the next movie(s) was ridiculous. Too much happy ending, not enough earning it. Everything he does is the other way around.

[ edited by Taaroko on 2008-12-09 06:44 ]
FYI, it's possible to have informed oneself about the Twilight series by reading insightful and directly informed criticism, even if one has not subjected oneself to the series. There are a lot of things I've never personally subjected myself to, but about which I have informed opinions. (Technically speaking, the very way in which we run the country depends upon being able to do that, for one thing.)
I liked the movie version (have never read the books) for its low-key charm. It's kinda cheesy -- esp. the fight scenes and, hee, sparkly vampire skin -- but the whole movie doesn't take itself too seriously, so it's not exactly painful. What Hardwicke, the director, brought to the table was her indie cred & experience with working with young actors, and all of that showed. The physical setting of the gray and damp Northeast felt authentic; some of the strongest scenes were between Bella and her dad; the leads were well-cast, appealing (Kristen Stewart is absolutely lovely, and she's now on my list of young actors to watch) and had chemistry. I've had much, much worse times in the theater.

Having said all that, there were times I felt I was watching a B-movie version of Buffy. At least four distinct instances where I immediately said: hey, Buffy did it better! Twilight is definitely rooted in, and limited by, its genre: teen romance. It's not going to appeal to you if you want more than that. And what Joss does is take a genre and always give you more: Buffy is romance, heartbreak, horror, family drama, epic fights and teen angst. Twilight is a tame beast in comparison, and I'd hate to see Joss limit himself to that.

I'm sad Hardwicke is being forced off the project. She's actually the reason I wanted to see the movie in the first place, because the combination of a hard-edged, female director and a teen romance pop cultural phenomenon was too tempting to resist. Now I think I'll skip the sequel.
Isn't it telling that the replacing of a director makes the headlines but writers are replaced every day and nobody bats an eye.
Am I really the only one who'd like Joss to rewrite Twilight while keeping the basics of the characters intact? I'd just like to know what he'd be able to do with a girl who has no powers whatsoever and a vampire who doesn't seem to be very... vampirey. Not to mention the fun scenes he could write with fursploding werewolves. And Alice! I think he'd write her pretty well, considering she's the only character who's genuinely liked by my friends who actually read the books (and they also like Buffy, so I'm assuming there's a correlation there somewhere).

Re: the director/writer business, I suppose it's assumed that a writer's job is to give the actors something to work with, while the directors are the ones with the 'vision' and therefore it would affect the movie more as a whole to have a different director than a different writer. Not to downplay the work of writers, but maybe the visuals for movies are seen as more front and center.
Makes sense to me; movies are a visual, one-and-done medium where direction shines. You hear more about the writers of televion than the directors, I'd say because television is more where (especially recently) serialized stories and character arcs shine. But in a movie, it's all what you can get across in that couple hours. For a movie, you'll get a better product with a great director and questionable script than you will with a lousy director and a great script.

I've read all the "Twilight" books, I had mixed feelings about all of them. I did like the movie, though, with few exceptions, the biggest being a horrible, horrible special effects decision.

The only argument I can see in favor of dumping Hardwicke is that from "New Moon" on, mostly due to the werewolves and their insta-change mythology, these movies will become more effect-intensive and therefore will cost more. $138 million on a movie that cost $37 million is great; $138 million on a movie that cost $77 million is less so. If they think they can lure someone who has the action cred, or the vampire cred (David Goyer? Len Wiseman?), I could see why they'd try to do that. But even that's no good for me, because I thought the action sequences in "Twilight" were handled quite well, particularly the fight scene that had no reference point from the novel (for reason of an unconscious narrator, ugh) and had to be created from scratch.

About Joss writing Alice -- I think he could have fun with all the Cullens, really, and the La Push characters, and Charlie... everybody but Bella, really. But Alice is actually one up on Joss -- I think she's the better brand of Drusilla. At least in the books, she became almost trivial in the movie, which is one of the real mistakes.

[ edited by KingofCretins on 2008-12-09 08:21 ]
I tweaked the headline btw. Also perhaps no more Twilight articles for a while. It's turning into Groundhog Day here.
Didn't you say that yesterday ? Din din dinnnnnn !
Simon, Wow, I'm more tired than I thought. I equated your reference to Groundhog Day with the 'holiday' and wondering what that would entail. Maybe Whedonesquers will watch as a Twilight fan leaves its burrow. If it sees its shadow, there will be 6 more Twilight sequels and maybe a TV show spinoff, and if it doesn't, summer's just around the corner?
Or it's possible you meant Groundhog Day the movie in which every day is the same and we can't escape it. I need more sleep.

As to the topic at hand, I seriously hope not. Even Joss couldn't save this series in my eyes.
I have read the books. Well, the first three.after barely making I decided not to subject my brain to that anymore. I haven't watched the movie. I might.I'm not sure.

I'm not sure if there's anything redemable about Twilight, even the theme of abstinence cause that all gets buried under all the awful messages it delivers. Joss could never direct this cause all the characters are weak, specially the women.

I've heard people refer to Edward as "gentleman-like" and an example of how boys should be today. I refer those people to read what actual gentlemen behaved like. read Regency or Victorian novels. and in general, I've found just because a boy or girl dates a lot of people or sleep around doesn't mean they're a horrible person.

Edward is crazy. and not hot enough to make up for it. Listen to Barney Stinson. all people who think Edward is wonderful are driving the "I wanna have sex with you wagon"

BTW,I am so tired of hearing about twilight. it's on my friendslist, it's there everytime I check metaquotes, on twitter and now Whedonesque?
I have read all four books, because parodies only work if you're familiar with the source material and because I zipped through them in like five days.

They're teen romance books with a supernatural flavor. The abstinence message is a good one, and there's some cute things in there, but the lack of depth to any of the characters (with the possible exception of Alice) means I'll never need to read them again because I won't get anything else out of them. And I was left with the unanswered question: why was Bella so special? She didn't condemn, and she smelled delicious. I should root for her? Kinda like Princess Buttercup in the movie (but not the book) "The Princess Bride," you had to wonder why she was worth all the effort.
Hmm. Interesting that Catherine Hardwicke is described as 'difficult' and 'irrational' and her agent Beth Swofford as 'ineffectual' and 'hysterical'.
I never read the books, but saw the movie.
It's not ultrageous like some people said (and who is saying this is the same guy who accuses Barbarella to be the most digusting ant-feminist thing). It's just bad. The stalker thing of Edward could just be noted in a close view (the same way Angel could be guilt of it). And his bigers domonstrations of power were a show in the woods (one way to put a kind of action in a boring movie) and in the end where his "father should stoped him. Kristen Stewart was great in Panic Room but don't had much to do here. Bella not seems so inacticve to me. She persues her objectives, but it's just a bad movie.
I never read Anita Blake's too, however seems to be more in the Buffy's realm.

If he does it, can Angelus cameo and kill everyone? please?
Why so much angry? Let Gandhi fill your heart and just wonder some monks doing a reality alteration spell where they never existed.
The Anita Blake books start off as something somewhat Buffy-ish and quickly become gothic porn. If that's your thing, go for it :). There's only so much hot undead/werewolf/etc. action one can take; your mileage may vary.
Really there doesn't seem to be much in the way of vampire fiction that doesn't quickly become gothic porn. There are exceptions but just about any vampire fiction I pick up usually becomes hilarious after a quick thumb-through, and then it's back to the library stack or bookstore display. Sadly I've got a similar thing with fantasy books, but less humor and more deep disappointment.
I never read the books, but saw the movie.

They wisely toned down some things that are in the book, such as Edward basically carrying Bella around everywhere in the later parts of the book, and even starts lifting her in and out of the car. You get a hint of that in the movie when he speedbuckles her into her seat.

And if I remember correctly they never mention the fact that Edward is spying on/mindreading everything Bella tells her friends.

Given the material I thought the movie wasn't awfull. Didn't hurt to watch Robert and Kristen either.

Edit: grr. why ain't the quote thingamabob working? OK. there we go.

[ edited by hence on 2008-12-09 17:27 ]
The Anita Blake books start off as something somewhat Buffy-ish and quickly become gothic porn.

Starts as Season 3 Buffy and quickly becomes Season 6?

Sorry, cheap shot, but worthwhile.

I don't want to pile on, but I kinda worry about Robert Pattinson. From the EW interview, to the bit about him being worried about being attacked by Twilight fans, he seems a little bit... off, to me. I thought he was a real plus in the movie, made Edward more likeable to me than the books did. But I hope he's okay, y'know?
C.A. Bridges, you rock! My vote is for "Lightning".

And add my vote to no more Twilight. We're on to things to come... more Jossian things.
Linnea1928 Thanks for the Groundhog Day clarification. I was also reading pre-caffeinated and having trouble figuring out how Twilight threads resemble a strange ritual for weather prediction.

Why so much angry? Let Gandhi fill your heart...

Wanna see my impression of Gandhi? :)
Why do I think Joss would shy away from being involved with a book/movie that portrays an abusive boyfriend/husband as an ideal man.

Oh Edward, it's ok that sex with you leaves me covered in bruises. It's ok because you love me!
Well Jacob, I would hold my wife down and physically force her to get an abortion against her will, but my CRAZY sister won't let me for some reason. But hey, maybe if you impregnate her, she'll abort my demon spawn and be just as happy carrying your kid. I mean, a baby's a baby, right?

Oh, yeah... spoilers. Whoops.

[ edited by JCapra on 2008-12-09 18:12 ]
I think I've seen films by at least half the people listed there, and they are all way, way too good for Twilight.
JCapra? Speaking as someone who read all the books - I think that is overly dramatic. You are leaving out A LOT of information surrounding the two instances you mention. Edward was never phsically abusive to Bella. The bruising was a result of his vampire strength and he felt terrible about it. And the "abortion"? The baby was literally killing her/ripping her body to pieces. He was trying to save her.


Joss is plenty busy doing his own work. He doesn't need to deal with "Twilight". They need to NOT make movies of these books.
Anita Blake is the anti-Buffy. Anita Blake, a series of novels I once enjoyed reading until they, as zeitgeist said, deteriorate into porn. Characters, in that series, are not defined by their passions or truths, but are instead fleshed out by three page long descriptions of their clothing. "Twilight" isn't at all similar to "Buffy," but it's a hell of a lot closer than "Anita Blake." Maybe if LKH, who has become an Anne Rice kinda crazy, stopped writing after the second (or maybe the third, in retrospect) book, she could have one up on "Twilight." But as it sits, I like most of Twilight (like the first book, kinda like the second, was annoyed by the third, and really enjoyed the fourth in which Bella becomes the most powerful of the group), but now even re-reads of the better "Anita Blake" books do nothing for me.

Maybe the "Anita Blake" movie--yup, it's in pre-prod, from what I hear--will pull a "Twilight" and be better than the book.
I know this is just something a blogger pulled out of their buttocks, and I seriously doubt it would happen because:

I don't think there would be any value added to the Twilight franchise by having Joss attached as the director. There just doesn't seem to be much cross-over appeal. Plus, I'm sure they could find a cheaper director than The Great Purple One.

Now, if the studio would agree to greenlight one of Joss' other projects in the deal, I'd be thrilled with this. Of course he would probably have to give up sleeping for it to happen.
Of course he would probably have to give up sleeping for it to happen.

Hey, it worked for Lorne, didn't it?

Well...kinda of...sort of. ;)
This would be extremely cool, but it's highly unlikely to happen, primarily because Summit probably won't be able to afford 'The Joss', and because he's rather busy at the moment with Dollhouse. Some of the other names on that blogger's list are also probably out of the question because of budget issues.
Because,Brazilian Chaos Man, those books don't deserve a reality-changing spell, and they can't even be burned. So killing everyone seems like a good idea. I've yet to see the movie but I hear they really toned down a lot of things. not to mention that Edward's worse traits are more obvious in the second book. like when he takes pieces off Bella's truck engine to stop her from going to visit Jacob. (who,BTW,it's in my opinion the only 'decent' character in the saga and that's just cause he's more-or-less a normal teenage boy)

in Twilight, Edward watching Bella sleep: Sweet
In Buffy,Angel watching Buffy: creepy.
I attempted to read the first book and gave up halfway. Too much sparkling.

For the sequels, I don't really see them using a big-name director. They'll make money either way.
I'm available. Not cause I like Twilight, but because I do enjoy money! You don't get much less big name than me as a director.
patxshand, I've read all four books and went to see the movie. I didn't care for the series in either format. The books were vapid, shallow, and inconsistent, and I thought the relationship between Edward and Bella was closer to abusive than romantic. I also wish that Meyer had picked up a textbook before attempting to write about the genetics of vampires and werewolves in the fourth book. The movie wasn't much better, though cutting out a lot of the teenage angst helped it a bit.

Honestly, I think whoever gets tapped to direct New Moon is going to get stuck with a flaming bag of crap. I mean, at least 80% of that book is detailed descriptions of Bella's whining and moping. There's only so much a director can do when their starting material is essentially this.
I don't know z. I've heard of you before, and I'm a small-town girl. You might be too costly. ;)
zeitgeist, you could subversive it up like nobody's business. However, then you might get called "irrational, difficult, ineffectual, and hysterical," for being assertive. Also possibly, "flighty and munchhausen-y" (I made that up) and get yourself fired. That's a risk all directors face, though. And writers.
kortkster - I'll limbo under their price restriction.

TonyaJ - Its a chance I'm willing to take!
Zeitgeist - I loved your take on "Killer Knitted Hats from Outer Space.2". (screenplay by Gossi, starring QuoterGal's Sockubus). Very Noir and you tackled existential issues very poignantly, in a light hearted upbeat way. Four Stars.
Hey, RollingInKittens, did you hear that there was a big fan-movement after "Killer Knitted Hats from Outer Space.2."?

They're ripping out the Star Trek display at the Las Vegas Hilton to make room. In fact, people are getting dressed up in hopes that they're bring the movies to television to ask the "why" part of the killer hats.
RollingInKittens: "Zeitgeist - I loved your take on "Killer Knitted Hats from Outer Space.2". (screenplay by Gossi, starring QuoterGal's Sockubus)."

*sigh* She already has nicer jewelry than me, but I guess I better get her an agent - and maybe some facework, considering that one of her eyes fell off at the Halloween Dr. Horrible Singalong.

There'll be no living with her now that she's getting bigger roles. She already sucked my soul out just because I mentioned that her Sockubutt could use a little work...
Well, I certainly pride myself on that, RollingInKittens. Rumors that Sockubus was anything but delightful on set were exaggerated in the extreme. We did seem to have an unusual number of soulless folk (even for a movie set) hanging about by the end, though. Hmmm...
I want the DVD! When's it coming out??
RollingInKittens, QuoterGal, zeitgeist- you guys ROCK! I heart you.
I have to ask... what would a textbook have told Meyer about the genetics of vampires and werewolves? Really, none of those things are the problems with her mythology. In fact, her werewolf mythology is very cool, IMO. Her vampire mythology isn't too bad either other than A) the sparkling, and B) them just being, overall, much too powerful/invincible. If you want your vampires out in the day, have them out in the day.
KingofCretins, any intro book on genetics would have given her the basics of inheritance, which Meyer clearly doesn't have.

All of the passages that talk about genetics and chromosome numbers are based on wrong assumptions or very little knowledge of inheritance. Not because I know the correct numbers of chromosomes for mythical creatures, but because the science is just plain bad; for example, the bit with the werewolves is not possible given the laws of inheritance.

Those bits weren't essential to the story, and the mythology would've been just fine without them. Since Meyer chose to include them, and since she's using real science to help validate her fantasy world, she should have checked that her system followed the basics.

*grin* Maybe I'm too sensitive to bad science in literature; I like my sci-fi to at least have the basics right, and I'm a grad student in genetics. It's not a big deal, just one of the many nit-picky little things that dropped me out of the story and could've been fixed if Meyer had picked up a book and learned a little more about the subject.

Edited to remove a lot of bitchy science talk.

[ edited by lhbach on 2008-12-10 05:44 ]
It’s the creationist disposition discernable there that gets to me.
Oh, boo, lhbach, I thought it was actually quite educational.
Aw, well it seems my sense of what's over the edge is on the fritz tonight. Instead of trying to remember what the heck I'd written before, here's an entire blog entry devoted to the three passages with glaringly bad science in the fourth book. Educational, with cussing and lame humor thrown in for free. It's win-win!
I don't know anything about Twilight, but I disagree with the comments about Joss not being able to handle abstinence as a topic. Much of season two pre-"Surprise," and then season three of Buffy was about the difficulty of maintaining abstinence, and I think it came off very well. I don't see why Joss would be incapable of dealing with a story about it.

But yeah. I'd rather see him do his own thing.

And yes, C.A. Bridges--VERY funny.

[ edited by WilliamTheB on 2008-12-10 07:58 ]
mongorules I appreciate that I gave some really simplified, snide versions of what happens in the book. I've also read all four of them and, if they were intended for adults, I would agree that nothing in them is that big a deal. But these are books meant for kids. For middle school and high school age girls who are in stages of their lives when they are learning what it means to be in love, in a relationship, etc. Forcing someone to abort "get rid of" a baby against their will (which IS what Edward and Jacob discuss at length and very directly) is never ok. A real life woman (without magic and vampires, etc.) should be allowed to decide what she wants to do with her pregnancy, even if it's hurting her. Do you really think the 7 to 13 year-olds who read these books are all going to be able to tell the difference? But maybe I'm just more pro-choice than Stephanie Meyer. And, by the way, not all spousal abuse is physical.

Sorry to make this a Twilight argument. It's totally not Joss related. Um... Yay Buffy!

[ edited by JCapra on 2008-12-10 22:51 ]
lhbach- thank you, thank you, for that link. That has to be one of the funniest things I have ever read because it is so exactly right. Meyers does not understand even basic biology! Or does not care. Holy moly!
Have been away but have come back to alot of fun stuff!

QuoterGal, if Sockubus needs a good plastic, macrame-ist, I know of a good one in Hollywood. (I know people who know people). And yes, Sockubus needs an agent, I can see her in the tabloids, "Pattinson and Sockubus seen at an exclusive eatery, gazing into each others' eyes", (or eye, in Sockubus' case). (And also, poor Teletubbie!)

zeitgeist - the soulless peeps on set wouldn't be Fox Execs would they?

korkster - as usual, you make me giggle like a school girl on laughing gas and I heart you too.

Tonya J - the video's coming in the new year, and included is a solo interpretive dance number by the one and only... Zeitgeist. (you heard it here first!)
the obvious answer here is... a world of no.
fortunateizzi | December 09, 02:15 CET

And the award for best post on the thread goes to ...... fortunateizzi!!
Typing mainly with one finger due to surgery on my arm last week, but had to weigh in with my opinion that Joss and un-empowered females, not mixy things. ;)

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home