*hyperventilates*
Nov. 1st, 2007 05:26 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
asdfghjkl OH MY GOD (link via
glitterdemon
JOSS WHEDON. ELIZA DUSHKU. TELEVISION. ASDFGHJL *breaks glass with high-pitched noises*
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
JOSS WHEDON. ELIZA DUSHKU. TELEVISION. ASDFGHJL *breaks glass with high-pitched noises*
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 04:40 am (UTC)Eliza, Joss, ohmygod!
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 04:43 am (UTC)CANNOT TEXTUALLY RENDER MY EXCITEMENT.
She So Purty
Date: 2007-11-01 04:40 am (UTC)Re: She So STAGGERINGLY HOT
Date: 2007-11-01 04:44 am (UTC)All dark hair and flashing eyes, and, and, and!
Date: 2007-11-01 05:06 am (UTC)But seriously, that's all I cna do when that girls onscreen. The fact that she plays awesome roles also... Just... I... My brain is melting.
Re: [censored]
Date: 2007-11-01 05:15 am (UTC)Re: so censored that even the black bars are melting [censored]
Date: 2007-11-01 05:31 am (UTC)Have you seen The New Guy? Not exactly a dynamite movie but watching Eliza slow ride a mechnical bull while wearing a neckerchief as a top...
*shudders*
Stoppit Tui, you'll get me into trouble!
Re: [censored] your MOM
Date: 2007-11-01 08:23 am (UTC)Me and
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:10 am (UTC)but...but...Fox? I thought Whedon swore up and down he'd never go back to them?
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:32 am (UTC)Unfortunately, this premise doesn't even pretend to break the pattern of Whedon-women-treatment. Nonetheless, it promises to be sexy-awesome.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:02 am (UTC)But damn, that dog.
"If it takes forever, I will wait for you. For a thousand summers, I will wait for you..."
*snuffle*
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:23 am (UTC)Futurama is the reason I can't watch too much Simpsons; I keep comparing them and The Simpsons always come up ultra-lite.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 08:26 am (UTC)Unfortunately, this premise doesn't even pretend to break the pattern of Whedon-women-treatment. Nonetheless, it promises to be sexy-awesome.
Yeah, I was thinking about that. And the thing is, as much as I can criticise Joss Whedon for his women, the one thing he always does is have characters, people on screen, including women - his faults tend to be in what happens to them, which can be a drag but - I'm trusting him. Because I love him and I miss him and hi, Joss Whedon is my master now.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 01:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 06:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 10:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 05:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 09:18 pm (UTC)Eliza Dushku is completely fucking hot!
(That scene in BTVS where Faith practially rapes Xander is one that will be with me forever)
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 09:34 pm (UTC)(I kind of hesitate at your word choice, man. :-/ rape is not hot.)
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 10:16 pm (UTC)Rape is what it is, an action of power by one induvidual on another individual without that individual's consent. Xander's reaction to the event (he felt violated and dirty, as I recall) was completely in line with being a victim of rape. Joss used that scene to plant the first seeds in our minds that Faith was not quite right, as a Slayer.
I *said* the scene will stay with me forever, not that it was hot. Eliza *was* hot and I think the point was being made by the paradox of a pretty person doing bad things. One of the "teachings" of BTVS (if you want to call them that) was "don't judge a book by its cover; look below the surface" or even - "people are what they do, not what they look like". Eliza looked hot but her character was not so much.
Work out whether your girl!crush is on Eliza or Faith - it does make a difference.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 10:24 pm (UTC)...right?
*sigh* I love Joss Whedon but his portrayal of anything regarding women and sex = extremely problematic, and the description of this new show frankly gives me the creeps in that regard.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 10:40 pm (UTC)I agree about Joss' writing weakness. People tend to cite the existence of Buffy as saying he's not sexist (and he probably isn't consciously so) but the remarkable thing about Buffy in the series was that she was a girl, whereas the remarkable thing in the movie was that she was an airhead. I think he should have stuck with that (which would probably have made it Cordelia the Vampire Slayer, and yes I know that Carpenter was an early choice for the lead role)
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 10:51 pm (UTC)*Unless they're lesbians, of course.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 11:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 11:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-01 11:53 pm (UTC)I concur that Faith is morally ambiguous - however, I'm not sure that I agree with your reading of the scene. By which I mean, I do think that this is the point from which we're supposed to start worrying about Faith, however, I also really feel like the show didn't actually do any work on convincing us that what happened to Xander was wrong, as opposed to what Faith did was wrong - that's a weird distinction and I need to rewatch the scene, but it always felt to me like Faith was being cast as the bad girl more because she was interested in sex and agressive about getting it, not because she was actually raping Xander.
-- which is not to say that I disagree with a reading of that scene as rape, because I don't.