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
"You're not special. You're extraordinary."
11971 members | you are not logged in | 19 January 2021


January 19 2006

Joss Whedon/Astonishing X-Men press conference and preview pages from #13. Some of the highlights: a new Joss Marvel project is likely this year, Joss more open to Buffy/Kitty X-Men crossover than Firefly/Starjammers and most importantly of all, major discussion by Joss about the X-Men. Full transcript of Joss' chat at Comic Book Resources.

Pretty pictures from Cassaday as always. I added the line about the press conference as it'll give us something to get excited about.
Yep, that looks great as always.

And ooooh!:

Marts confirmed that Astonishing won't be Whedon's only Marvel work in the coming year, saying that he will likely have a second Marvel Universe project of some kind in 2006, though he declined to say what the project would be, or any details on length or format…

Stay off the Internet, stay off the internet

Another t-shirt worthy slogan. I like this conference. I'm having fun.

I reckon the new project will be S.W.O.R.D..
Awesome stuff. Not a big comic reader but I have read Joss's stuff and despite not knowing any of the continuity, I enjoyed Astonishing X-Men.
Asked if a Starjammers/Firefly crossover would be a possibility, Marts, while admitting the idea was a good one, said the decision would be Whedon's to make.

That has got to be one of the lamest ideas ever. One of the things that made Firefly interesting is that there was no aliens. I sure as hell hope that doesn't happen.
I figure Joss and Marts are teasing.
Just for the characters, I think the interaction between the crews of the Starjammer and Serenity would be great. Wouldn't mind seeing that as a special or a gag, even if the 'verses do clash. Maybe Marvel can do another issue of "Wha... Huh?" ;-)
War-machine, do you seriously think that a Starjammers/Firefly crossover wouldn't be a good read?

Like Simon said, the idea is most likely just a joke but if it ever came to pass i'd definately get a copy, if only to see the no doubt colourful conversations between Corsair and Mal! :)
River meets the Silver Surfer *head explodes*.
River telling Galactus that it's not nice eating people's planets. :-D
Well, she could at least warn Galactus that the ice planets are problematic...
Yes I seriously do. I've never been a fan of the Starjammers. I'm not even sure I'd buy it it Joss wrote it. Thankfully it will likely never happen.
I read one issue of Starjammers and I can't remember how many years ago that was. But I'm getting excited about the next two arcs of AXM. And that's good.
I'm not even sure I'd buy it it Joss wrote it.

I might be a weird fanboy, but I don't think there's anything I wouldn't buy if Joss wrote it. If the big man think it's a good enough concept to be able to tell a story worth telling, then I'd just trust him - Joss' work hasn't let me down yet, after all.

Having said that: I'd love to see a cross-over like that, as long as it isn't serious in any way.
Yes much excitement about the AXM.
In speaking of his progress, Whedon noted that he is ahead on his scripts, citing a bet he's made with his wife where, if he's late, he has to watch an unnamed movie three times in a row.

hm. I'm betting the unnamed movie is something along the lines of that cinematic gemstone St Elmo's Fire (which is definitely one of my horrible guilty pleasures, god the eighties were good for that). Actually, I think I just want to make Joss watch St Elmo's Fire with me and make horrible, horrible fun of everything.
Thanks, Simon. You crack me up.
So, is it a movie that she loves and thinks he ought to as well? Or is it strictly punishment? And yes, what is the movie?
The Starjammers are a severely underused part of the X-Men universe, certainly in recent years anyway. I'd definately be there for a Joss written Starjammers series.

Simon, if you are talking a few years ago then you must mean the first limited series by Warren Ellis and Carlos Pacheco. I'd have bought that series even if i hadn't loved the team. One of my favourite writers combined with one of my absolute favourite artists made that a must buy.

As for the Galactus/River thing, i can totally see him making her into his latest herald. Now that is another comic i would read! :)
That Warren Ellis gets about. I've added another link to the subject line, it's a full transcript of Joss' chat.
Mmmm, transcripty goodness. Well spotted, Simon.

ETA: From the transcript:

I have other projects that I would love to do, but I have movie scripts that are a little bit late and TV shows and other things.

(my emphasis) Is that just a general reference/slip of the tongue or tantalising hint of something on the cards ?

[ edited by Saje on 2006-01-20 01:27 ]
I did this interview a few hours ago and now I'm reading it. The interweb is freaking me out!

I want to point out that in the transcript where it says (laughs), it means the other people on the call, not me. If you don't understand that, I come off even dorkier than I usually intend.

Also, though I enjoyed the Starjammers (and Starlord, EARLY Byrne/Austin) (and Star Wars) (A New hope) no way in heckity would they ever cross paths with the Firefly crew, for reasons stated above. Having said that, YEAH, I TOTALLY flashed on River as Galactus's new herald. Why does that seem perfectly reasonable?

Comics are awesome. Leave me.

[ edited by joss on 2006-01-20 01:29 ]
So, did you mean TV shows?
And, welcome.

[ edited by Lioness on 2006-01-20 01:31 ]
Comics are awesome. And it was a great conference call. Cheers :).
Comics are awesome. Leave me.

Can't we bring you with? :) The interview was today, huh? That was some speedy writing-up.

And, JW, you are more like Earshot Cordy ("I don't have an unspoken thought") than I ever would have imagined.

I'm inferring that the 'Jammers had their own book at some point - anyone got specifics? I loved them in the Byrne/Claremont Dark Phoenix sequence, and a little later in the Brood story of the UXM 160s, but haven't seen them since. Maybe because I was walking past comic book stores with my eyes closed for a number of years there.
Hey joss *waves*.

Yep, this TV shows remark is intriguing the flying flapoolas (yes, it's late, I couldn't think of an actual word to use) out of me. It'd be ever so awesome to have more whedony tv things to look forward to.

Agreeage with, well, all of you, on the River/Galactus thing. And, yes, comics are awesome. We are all most wise.
Joss wrote:

Having said that, YEAH, I TOTALLY flashed on River as Galactus's new herald. Why does that seem perfectly reasonable?

Okay, i may have just inspired Joss Whedon to write something. My life is complete!

Oh, hang on a second. Still got that "get a date with Amy Lee" thing to do. Better get working on that now then! :)
SNT, regarding your Starjammers question:

Starjammers Vol.1 by Warren Ellis and Carlos Pacheco. 4 issue limited series, first issue dated Oct 95.

Starjammers Vol.2 by Kevin Anderson and Alé Garza/Sean Parsons/Jorge Lucas. 6 issue limited series, first issue dated Sep 04.

There is some dispute over whether the second series was true Marvel 616 continuity but it generally accepted that it is. Hope that helps.
Thanks, VWAG! And kudos on the Galactus/River suggestion - t'was a great image.
Joss, I totally thought the (laughs) were yours, and it did seem oddly dorky, even for you. ;-)

As far as working on "TV shows", I'm not reading too much into it. I think Joss always has ideas floating around in various stages of development. Also he might be referring to the Spike movie, which is easier to describe to a comics crowd as "TV show" than "a TV (maybe cable) or direct-to-DVD movie based on characters from my previous TV shows".

(Edited to fix the spelling of "referring". "Refering" would be something else entirely...)

[ edited by jam2 on 2006-01-20 01:51 ]
Fair enough jam2. That does seems likely. So I will go back to wondering about my previous question. What movie is so horrible that he is on time with his scripts?
That's the thing about tantalising hints, they leave you feeling all tantalised.

Well anyway i'm still hoping that when I wake up tomorrow there'll be a nice shiny TV show waiting (not asking much just 2-3 seasons to start with). It'd certainly make up for that bike Santa 'forgot' when I was 8.

Lioness: Alien 4 ?
Yeah, I'd love to know what The Movie is. I will say I've never heard him speak so negatively about a movie as he did about "Underworld". Or maybe Kai threatened to make him watch "Alien: Resurrection" 3 times in a row. A different kind of torture. ;-)

ETA: Ah, Saje beat me to it. =)

[ edited by jam2 on 2006-01-20 02:09 ]
Ah, shiny transcript goodness combined with Joss postage. Indeed comics are awesome and so is this thread :)
S'funny you bring Alien Resurrection up, Saje. I finally shelled out for the Quadrilogy boxed set (well well worth it - if you like that kind of thing), and finally got to see a very youthful-looking JW talking about his approach to the "canon" and material in a really delightful way. And then Sigourney and Wynona and a few others talking about how blown away by the script they all were, how it was genius, etc. I knew in general the material was on there, but it was lovely to see it.

And then I guess it didn't quite turn out the way it was meant to. (Although I like AR a lot more than most, I think).
Y'know what? Regardless of what is said about Alien: Resurrection in comparison to the first three Alien movies, it still isn't all that bad a flick. There are a hell of a lot worse science fiction movies out there than that.

In fact i would probably say that, in certain ways at least, i prefer the fourth movie in the series to the one that came before. For whatever reason the third Alien movie just never grabbed me in the way the first two had managed to. The fourth may not have been perfect either but it didn't entirely suck in the way that many say it did. At least not in my opinion.
Makes you wonder what could have been.

I'm quite tempted by the Alien set now that it's come down a bit (Amazon have it for £25 which is pretty reasonable) since it seems to have some worthwhile extras (especially the commentaries and first drafts of the scripts) and I haven't seen the director's cut of Alien yet. I thought 4 was OK, it just has some really bad moments which tend to overshadow the good stuff (I think the Ripley/Alien DNA mesh is a brilliant idea) especially in the last third.

Or I could wait for the £130 limited edition set which, for that money, presumably comes with its own working deep space vessel.

ETA: VWaG, yeah agree about 3 to some extent. Although I think 4 is the least good on average, 3 has, for me, the worst moment of the quadrilogy where Hicks et al are unceremoniously (and very lazily) written out of the movie in the first 5 minutes (presumably cos they couldn't get the actors). Poor.

[ edited by Saje on 2006-01-20 02:43 ]
3 has, for me, the worst moment of the quadrilogy where Hicks et al are unceremoniously (and very lazily) written out of the movie in the first 5 minutes (presumably cos they couldn't get the actors). Poor.
Exactly! Well said, Saje.
"The interview was today, huh? That was some speedy writing-up."

Heck, Newsarama had it up as the conference was going on, and was updating the page every few minutes with new bits. :-)

On Starjammers--If anyone wants to look into it, definitely go for the Warren Ellis version, as it was quite brilliant. I'd actuallt dispute that the Kevin J Anderson version was in (616) continuity at all--it's certainly not likely to ever be referenced again, being the sales failure that it was. And by the way, there was also actually a much older book, a two-issue X-Men Present: The Starjammers, with art by Starjammers co-creator Dave Cockrum. Written by Terry Kavanagh, I *think*, and very old-school sci-fi adventure.

On Alien: Resurrection--I maintain that it s a great film to watch, and that is so because the characters are very Whedon, and you immediately care for them. That being said, I understand why a movie like this or X-Men is unwatchable for Joss, because he got to figure out exactly how he wanted them to be, and then they were done differently.
Yeah 3 is my least favourite as well and I think of lot of it is down to the opening. That said I've not seen 3 nor 4 since they 1st came out so it's probably time I gave them a 2nd chance. Especially since Aliens is one of my all time favourite films.
Say, if Joss is posting here, he's not really paying much attention to the second most important thing he learned since entering the comics industry, is he? :-P
Heh, Telltale, I was remembering the Fury interview posted of late that had been lingering for a year or so. By comparison, same day seemed nice and quick.

And nothing will *ever* top Alien for me - watching bits of all four movies in sequence, together with their associated special features confirms that for me.

When Ridley Scott tells a Q & A audience that he had guys pushing bits of the spaceship walls along with the action, or filmed the alien planet sequence through a 8mm camera because the poor quality of the model would have been too visible through a normal lens, well, you've just gotta love the genius and creativity that went into it (and which was demanded by the relative poverty of the budget). Aliens is terrific, but lacks that very personal labor-of-love vibe for me.
Telltale, personally i would agree with you on your opinion that the second Starjammers series was only dubiously 616 connected but i believe that is what Marvel consider it to be. As you say though, it is likely that it will never be referenced again so i guess you can take it either way.

Totally forgot about that older X-Men Spotlight: Starjammers series, probably because i've yet to read it. Have to get around to that sometime.
where did this conference take place? like in nyc at the marvel offices? or like, one of those strange press conferences we see on tv... or like over the phone? i mean maybe im the only one who doesn't quite get what "marvel had a conference" means- or the only one who cares. lol.
I finally got my hands on an issue of axm- and i have to say joss is brilliant- totally brought it back to the good old x-men days (which for me is claremont).
Okay, I may have just inspired Joss Whedon to write something. My life is complete!
Incredibly kewl! Well done, VWaG! :-)
Hey Joss!

I just wanna say, kudos for "Fastball Special" moment. I haven't read any X-men comics in a long time, but when I read that issue and Logan turns to Peter and says "I've got 2 words for you", all my love for the series just came flooding back.

So thank you for that, at the very least.
"The Danger Room is angry."

Why do I keep hearing this in River's voice?
Because you watched Serenity one times to many? :)
There's no such thing, NickSeng ;-)
Or Objects in Space.
I will never leave you, nor forsake you.
Seriously, I agree. "The Danger Room is angry" is just like River speak. Oh, giddy!
Stay off the Internet, stay off the Internet

How ironic is that statement now that Joss has posted about the article.
kate, at the beginning of the article, it says that Joss joined the call a few minutes after it had begun.
thank you!:) lol- i didn't think anyone was gonna answer me.

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