Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Agents Of SHIELD: Yes Men

Agents Of SHIELD Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#21 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 12 March 2014 - 10:30 PM

View PostBklnScott, on 12 March 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

As NC points out, that's what the show is - and why it is getting a second season for sure - but that doesn't mean it can't be good within that framework.
I agree. There's really no reason why the show can't be good on those terms. I just think they're a long ways off from actually achieving that goal, which is a shame. Too many of the tie-ins feel forced or like an afterthought, with everything else feeling like they're just biding their time until the next movie tie-in. I say this as someone that tried really hard to get into this series and gave up (aka, a "loser" according to Clark Gregg) because it wasn't going anywhere interesting (to me anyway). There's really no reason why they can't be doing movie tie-ins and their own thing. The problem is they don't seem to be focusing very strongly on either, and that's truly baffling to me.
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#22 enTranced

enTranced

    Chasing Your Starlight!

  • Islander
  • 15,772 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 12:35 AM

While Fitz is great I agree that it's Simmons who is close to being the breakout character on the show.

I was a little let down on the whole with this episode but I am a HUGE Sif fan and loved this episode ofr the Sif-y goodness it delivered.

enTranced
Posted Image

#23 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 06:12 AM

I suspect the last half dozen episodes of this season (which take place post-Cap2) will set up a whole new status-quo going forward - resulting in a big improvement in the show.  But I guess we'll see...

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#24 Tricia

Tricia

    To err on the side of kindness is seldom an error.

  • Islander
  • 10,245 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:34 AM

View PostenTranced, on 13 March 2014 - 12:35 AM, said:

While Fitz is great I agree that it's Simmons who is close to being the breakout character on the show.


I have to say that it's those two characters that I'm always paying the most attention to, that I feel are the most interesting of the whole bunch.

In true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. --Thich Nhat Hanh


You don't need to attend every argument you are invited to


Do not ask that your kids live up to your expectations.  Let your kids be who they are, and your expectations will be in breathless pursuit.


#25 G-man

G-man

    Is there a problem?

  • Moderator
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 09:56 AM

View PostTricia, on 13 March 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

View PostenTranced, on 13 March 2014 - 12:35 AM, said:

While Fitz is great I agree that it's Simmons who is close to being the breakout character on the show.


I have to say that it's those two characters that I'm always paying the most attention to, that I feel are the most interesting of the whole bunch.

I think that's as much thanks to the casting, as to the writing.  The actors are engaging, and the characters are actually fun.  They have their strengths and weaknesses, and we see them actually trying really, really hard to accomplish things that's just so simple for the others, and they actually exhibit a sense of humor.  Consequently, I believe that the writers actually have the most fun writing them.

This is so unlike the others who are simply so earnest about everything.  Skye is the little girl lost with mad hacking skills, Ward is the generic tough guy, May is the generic tough girl, and Coulson is the father-figure of the group; and they all have mysteries surrounding them which has been more of the writers' focus than providing them with distinctive voices and idiosyncracies.  Consequently, I feel that the writers have neglected their personalities even as they tease about their back-stories, making those characters, in a word, boring.

A development that I actually find surprising in a series bearing Joss Whedon's name.

/s/

Gloriosus
the G-man Himself
Let me strive every moment of my life to make myself better and better, to the best of my ability, so that all may profit by it.
Let me think of the right and lend my assistance to all who may need it, with no regard for anything but justice.
Let me take what comes with a smile, without loss of courage.
Let me be considerate of my country, of my fellow citizens, and my associates in everything I say and do.
Let me do right to all, and wrong no man.
-- Doc Savage

Few people want to be moderated, most people see the need for everyone else to be moderated. -- Orpheus

#26 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 11:26 AM

View PostBklnScott, on 13 March 2014 - 06:12 AM, said:

I suspect the last half dozen episodes of this season (which take place post-Cap2) will set up a whole new status-quo going forward - resulting in a big improvement in the show.  But I guess we'll see...
We can hope, I guess. There's really no reason they couldn't have done more with the show this season, though. It feels like they're just killing time until The Winter Soldier comes out. And then they'll probably just kill time until the next big Marvel movie. I really hope I'm wrong. I want to see this show improve. I'm just at a loss when it comes to understanding what this show is supposed to be and what purpose it serves as it currently stands.

I think they would have been better off treating this show as multiple miniseries. They could air a miniseries in the weeks leading up to a new Marvel movie. Each miniseries would have its own story arc that sets the stage for the upcoming movie while exploring a series of smaller cases and one larger one. This would allow them to build hype for the movie and focus more strongly on the tie-in aspects of the show. I think it would result in tighter storytelling and give the writing more structure than it currently seems to have.

View PostG-man, on 13 March 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

A development that I actually find surprising in a series bearing Joss Whedon's name.
It's really not all that surprising when you look closer and realize that Joss Whedon is barely involved in the day to day operations of the show. His name is on the series but he isn't the showrunner.

Edited by NeuralClone, 13 March 2014 - 11:29 AM.

"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#27 Niko

Niko
  • Watchdog
  • 2,346 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 11:48 AM

Totally agree about Fitz-Simmons being the stand-outs.  They're the main thing keeping me around, and I can easily see myself falling into a mode with this show of keeping an eye on the previews and only tuning in for ones that seem like they're Fitz-centric, in particular.

My only big "Ugh" in the episode was the intimation that Ward is pining after Skye.  I was so proud of them for not going that route when Ward hooked up with May, but nope, they were just holding off for a bit of soapy drama.  :p   (Or have I not been paying enough attention and there's someone else Lorelei might have been referring to?)
- Whatsoever you do to the least of my people, that you do unto me.    (Matthew 25:40)

- Do not let kindness and truth leave you; Bind them around your neck, Write them on the tablet of your heart.  (Proverbs 3:3)

#28 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 33,146 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 12:06 PM

I figure it's either Skye or Fitz...
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Patreon Page -- Featuring reviews and original fiction
Facebook Author Page

#29 G-man

G-man

    Is there a problem?

  • Moderator
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 12:35 PM

View PostNeuralClone, on 13 March 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

View PostG-man, on 13 March 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

A development that I actually find surprising in a series bearing Joss Whedon's name.
It's really not all that surprising when you look closer and realize that Joss Whedon is barely involved in the day to day operations of the show. His name is on the series but he isn't the showrunner.

Well, considering that the main characters of MCU ALL had exhibited senses of humor, in addition to any angst they might have, and especially that Whedon's specialty is characterization, that he'd have people who are so weak in that regard running a show bearing his imprimatur IS surprising.

/s/

Gloriosus
the G-man Himself
Let me strive every moment of my life to make myself better and better, to the best of my ability, so that all may profit by it.
Let me think of the right and lend my assistance to all who may need it, with no regard for anything but justice.
Let me take what comes with a smile, without loss of courage.
Let me be considerate of my country, of my fellow citizens, and my associates in everything I say and do.
Let me do right to all, and wrong no man.
-- Doc Savage

Few people want to be moderated, most people see the need for everyone else to be moderated. -- Orpheus

#30 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 01:03 PM

View PostG-man, on 13 March 2014 - 12:35 PM, said:

Well, considering that the main characters of MCU ALL had exhibited senses of humor, in addition to any angst they might have, and especially that Whedon's specialty is characterization, that he'd have people who are so weak in that regard running a show bearing his imprimatur IS surprising.
I guess that's fair. What's odd is I've always liked Jed Whedon and Maurissa Tancharoen's writing. They wrote some of the best episodes of Dollhouse. And Jeffrey Bell was usually pretty good on Angel. Their episodes of this show have generally been some of the stronger episodes but they still seem lacking for a show with Whedon's name on it. The dialogue isn't as sharp as I'd expect and the characters are rather dull. So, yeah, I guess I agree with you. The lack of Whedon's day to day involvement certainly explains some of that but he's usually been good at choosing people to run his shows.

Marti Noxon is a good counter-example to that, however. The more involved with Buffy she became, the more it became about hating on men and victimizing women (not the point of the show). So his track record certainly isn't flawless.
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#31 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 01:32 PM

It's corporate whedon product - not a joss whedon show.  Which explains why it's basically Firefly with the politics inverted ... Can you imagine if Mal & Co worked for The Man?  Now you don't have to.  

That's been the trouble with the show - but I suspect not for much longer.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#32 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 33,146 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 02:00 PM

View PostBklnScott, on 13 March 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

It's corporate whedon product - not a joss whedon show.  Which explains why it's basically Firefly with the politics inverted ...

That implies that Firefly's politics are the same as Whedon's, and that's not true. Whedon has said that he probably wouldn't be comfortable having Mal Reynolds over to dinner. He didn't create the character to promulgate his own politics, but because he found it creatively interesting to explore a character with such different views from his own.

Granted, it's true that a recurring theme in Whedon's work has been to question the ethics of power. But I think the main recurring theme in his work has been a skepticism toward conventional definitions of good and evil. Over time, his shows have become less about good guys fighting bad guys and more about morally ambiguous, deeply flawed people trying to cope as best they can with morally ambiguous situations. That thread has definitely been present in Agents of SHIELD from the very beginning, with questions being repeatedly raised about whether SHIELD is really the ethical organization the characters want to believe it is. The show hasn't been as overtly in the same kind of moral gray space as Firefly and Dollhouse, since it has to fit into the more conventional heroic paradigm of the Marvel Universe, but the ambiguity has been there all along. So not inverted so much as subdued.

Edited by Christopher, 13 March 2014 - 02:01 PM.

"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Patreon Page -- Featuring reviews and original fiction
Facebook Author Page

#33 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 05:23 PM

I'm not sure how what Scott said implies anything about Joss Whedon's political views. He's talking about the premise, the people running the show, and why it doesn't have the usual Whedon feel to it.
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#34 RJDiogenes

RJDiogenes

    Idealistic Cynic

  • Demigod
  • 14,659 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 06:31 PM

View PostBklnScott, on 12 March 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

Yes.  That was the twist at the end of Thor 2.  Thor refuses the throne of Asgard and goes to live on Earth with Jane Foster.  Odin reluctantly accepts this and you think, "Oh, he's getting soft in his old age."  Then we see that it's Loki.  We don't know what he did with Odin. So it was actually Loki who sent Sif to retrieve Lorelei - alive.  
Interesting. What motivation would he have to do that, and how would it tie into the series?  I wonder if the showrunners didn't know about that twist when they came up with the story.

View PostChristopher, on 12 March 2014 - 10:12 PM, said:

Coulson pointed at Skye's midsection, where she was shot, and said that the first step they'd take would be to find the person who did "this" and make him pay. I take that to mean hunting down either Mike Peterson/Deathlok or the Clairvoyant, or both.  
Okay, I thought they were still talking about TAHITI and resurrection and alien juice.  That makes more sense.  He must have meant the Clairvoyant.

View PostNeuralClone, on 13 March 2014 - 11:26 AM, said:

I'm just at a loss when it comes to understanding what this show is supposed to be and what purpose it serves as it currently stands.  
What do you mean purpose?  It's an enjoyable adventure show.  What purpose did Star Trek serve?  Or Wild Wild West?  Or Mission: Impossible? Just because it's part of the Marvel Movie Universe doesn't mean it has to tie in with every movie.

View PostNiko, on 13 March 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

My only big "Ugh" in the episode was the intimation that Ward is pining after Skye.  I was so proud of them for not going that route when Ward hooked up with May, but nope, they were just holding off for a bit of soapy drama.  :p   (Or have I not been paying enough attention and there's someone else Lorelei might have been referring to?)  
She didn't mention Skye's name, which I think is significant.  I think we were supposed to think that it's Skye.
Please visit The RJDiogenes Store. Posted Image   And my Gallery. Posted Image And my YouTube Page. Posted Image And read Trunkards. Posted Image  And then there's my Heroes Essays.  Posted Image

#35 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 07:17 PM

View PostRJDiogenes, on 13 March 2014 - 06:31 PM, said:

What do you mean purpose? It's an enjoyable adventure show.  What purpose did Star Trek serve?  Or Wild Wild West?  Or Mission: Impossible?
This is an enjoyable adventure show? I might buy that if the characters were fun or if there was actually some adventure. Firefly was an enjoyable adventure show. So was Farscape. And so was Star Trek. Those shows all have two very important things in common: smart dialogue and interesting characters with unique and often conflicting personalities. The characters drive the stories.

This show has forced dialogue and characters that are about as exciting and animated as bricks. If they could fix that major problem, the show would improve dramatically. But someone thought that the bland, somewhat amusing background character of Coulson would be perfect to lead a series, and the rest fell into place around that terrible idea. So I highly doubt they even see this as a problem.

Or for a too long/didn't read summary, this show has a cool premise filled with boring stories that are populated with cliched, boring characters. For something based on a fun comic book movie/universe, this show is severely lacking in fun.

Quote

Just because it's part of the Marvel Movie Universe doesn't mean it has to tie in with every movie.
Someone should tell that to the people running and writing this show then. Because that's exactly what they're doing and what they're using this show for. It seems to be the only reason it exists.
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"

#36 DWF

DWF

    Dr. Who 1963-89, 1996, 2005-

  • Islander
  • 48,287 posts

Posted 13 March 2014 - 08:50 PM

Well I don't think the show is being used merely as a tie in for the movies and the show is a mixed bag so far, but then we don't know what kind of pressure ABC and Marvel is putting on the show.
The longest-running science fiction series: decadent, degenerate and rotten to the core. Power-mad conspirators, Daleks, Sontarans... Cybermen! They're still in the nursery compared to us. Fifty years of absolute fandom. That's what it takes to be really critical.

"Don't mistake a few fans bitching on the Internet for any kind of trend." - Keith R.A. DeCandido

#37 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 06:30 AM

View PostChristopher, on 13 March 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

View PostBklnScott, on 13 March 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

It's corporate whedon product - not a joss whedon show.  Which explains why it's basically Firefly with the politics inverted ...

That implies that Firefly's politics are the same as Whedon's, and that's not true.

I did not intend to imply that.  

Quote

Granted, it's true that a recurring theme in Whedon's work has been to question the ethics of power.

And he does so very well - even from the point of view of characters who are on the inside, who are part of the establishment, as with the final season of Angel or Dollhouse.  That's the point.  Angels of SHIELD has failed to thread that (admittedly very complicated) needle… and so we're questioning not just whether the larger SHIELD organization does more bad than good, but whether our heroes do.  The former is what they were going for. The latter is where they got to - particularly in the Guest House assault - and the result is a show that often feels at odds with itself on that level.

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!

#38 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 33,146 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 09:02 AM

View PostBklnScott, on 14 March 2014 - 06:30 AM, said:

Angels of SHIELD has failed to thread that (admittedly very complicated) needle… and so we're questioning not just whether the larger SHIELD organization does more bad than good, but whether our heroes do.  The former is what they were going for. The latter is where they got to - particularly in the Guest House assault - and the result is a show that often feels at odds with itself on that level.

I don't agree with that at all. Whedon's shows are never just about questioning other people's morality. They're about questioning the ethics of what the lead characters themselves are doing. Heck, pretty much everything Whedon's done post-Angel, and much of what he did in Angel, has been focused on protagonists who were at least nominally bad guys. So I think that making us question whether Coulson's team itself is in the right is very much a part of what the showrunners intend.
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Patreon Page -- Featuring reviews and original fiction
Facebook Author Page

#39 G-man

G-man

    Is there a problem?

  • Moderator
  • 8,740 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 01:12 PM

^^^ Maybe that was their intent.  My contention is that their execution of it has been maladroit.

/s/

Gloriosus
the G-man Himself
Let me strive every moment of my life to make myself better and better, to the best of my ability, so that all may profit by it.
Let me think of the right and lend my assistance to all who may need it, with no regard for anything but justice.
Let me take what comes with a smile, without loss of courage.
Let me be considerate of my country, of my fellow citizens, and my associates in everything I say and do.
Let me do right to all, and wrong no man.
-- Doc Savage

Few people want to be moderated, most people see the need for everyone else to be moderated. -- Orpheus

#40 NeuralClone

NeuralClone
  • Islander
  • 23,092 posts

Posted 14 March 2014 - 02:36 PM

View PostG-man, on 14 March 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

^^^ Maybe that was their intent.  My contention is that their execution of it has been maladroit.
I agree.

(Also, nice adjective to describe their execution of it. ;))
"My sexuality's not the most interesting thing about me."
— Cosima Niehaus, Orphan Black, "Governed By Sound Reason and True Religion"



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Agents Of SHIELD, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users