Well Played, Mr. Whedon. Well Played

Via Nerdacy

I have complex feelings about spoilers, but what is simple is that too much has been lumped under the heading of "spoilers." Mostly, spoilers are just an excuse to justify being coy and... well, dickish. Take J.J. Abrams, whose staunch refusal to reveal who Benedict Cumberbatch was playing in Into Darkness not only wasn't unnecessary in terms of protecting the plot, but it also keelhauled the actors from being able to discuss their characters in public beforehand. And it wasn't a spoiler, or rather, it wasn't a twist, which is what we actually mean when we say "spoiler." Not really. It was revealed half way through the film, and didn't fundamentally change the direction of the film (I'll redirect you here to find out his identity, because if I do it here, people will yell).

It wasn't a spoiler. Spock dying at the end of Wrath of Khan, that's a spoiler. Norman Bates being the killer at the end of Psycho, that's a spoiler. Generally speaking, I feel that acknowledgement that a character is being present in a film is not a spoiler, it's just a credit. There are exceptions: Ben Kingsley being credited as The Mandarin in Iron Man 3, not a spoiler. Anything else, yes absolutely. Because that reveal fundamentally changes the focus and course of the remainder of the film. Same would be true of Liam Neeson being credited as Ra's Al Ghul in Batman Begins. Of course, this speaks more deeply to the weird twist-obsessed nature of film nowadays (and for which, like so many things, I blame M. Night Shyamalan), where the inclusion of a twist is expected or perceived to be mandatory. And revealing such a twist is paramount to killing joy. I live by a simple rule, one not invented, but deeply held by Alfred Hitchcock: don't give away the ending. Everything else is fair game.

Hit the jump to find out what Joss Whedon said to demand an article long enough for me to bury the lead after a jump.
All of this has been quite a long run up to getting you to think about the Avengers, a movie that is largely twist-less. There is no third act surprise, it is just the deliberate unveiling of character motivations and consequences. Skyfall too, for that matter. And I can't believe that two of last year's best films lacking an exploitative moment is a coincidence. But to hammer home this point, and to thumb the noses of the like of Abrams, or Doctor Who show runner Steven Moffat, who not only holds information back, but lies like a Cold War-era intelligence operative who is very good at lying, Whedon has done something remarkable: he was forth-with, honest and plain about something.

Scarlett Witch and Quicksilver, surprising no one, will be in the Avengers 2. Maybe. Sorry, but you have to qualify that statement when the script is still in the first draft and no actors have been cast. Until the film starts rolling, no one is guaranteed to be in the picture, and not even then what with editing and all. Said Whedon, talking to IGN, "They're interesting to me because they sort of represent the part of the world that wouldn't necessarily agree with The Avengers. So they're not there to make things easier. I'm not putting any characters in the movie that will make things easier."

What is refreshing is the cavalier and apathetic way that Whedon and Marvel films President Kevin Feige aren't shrouding this in mystery. It's just the facts, ma'am. They've tried mystery, with the various after credit sequences, and Iron Man 3 in particular, and have had some success. But I feel, and I suspect this is how Whedon probably feels too (you'd have to ask him to know for sure), is that people don't come to the table when they don't know what they're going to be expected to eat. So, this is what's on the menu.

He was also asked about the involvement of Tony Stark in Avengers 2, and said, "The question is, if The Avengers are called, does he show up? And the answer is, 'Yes!'" Considering the ending of Iron Man 3, I guess that means Whedon's going to have explaining to do come 2015.

I still think Captain Britain would have been a better choice, though.

Via The Mary Sue.
Share on Google Plus

About MR. Clark

Adopting the descriptor of "successfully unpublished author", MR. Clark began writing things on the internet in 2012, which he believed to be an entirely reputable and civilized place to find and deliver information. He regrets much.


Post a Comment